Sheridan v News Group Newspapers Limited: SCS 11 Dec 2018

The pursuer had succeeded in his defamation claim with an award of substantial damages. The defender then failed in an application for a retrial, despite evidence undermining the award. The pursuer obtained an order for interest to be payable from the time it would have been calculated but for the appeal. The defender appealed.

Citations:

[2018] ScotCS CSIH – 76

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Defamation, Damages

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.634462

Kuchenmeister v Home Office: QBD 1958

The plaintiff, a German national landed at Heathrow airport en route to Dublin. The immigration officers, instead of refusing him leave to land (as they had been instructed to do), detained him at the airport until it was too late for him to catch the Dublin flight. They might have had other powers to detain him, but had wrongly acted under the 1953 Order which gave no such power.
Held: He had been wrongfully imprisoned. The immigration officers had no power to detain the claimant in such a way as to prevent his transiting from one aircraft to another The right of liberty is a precious right entitled to protection. Barry J said: ‘His liberty was restricted to a greater degree than the immigration authorities were entitled to restrict it under [the particular power they sought to rely upon]. The fact that they might have restricted his mobility by employing the powers conferred upon them by other articles of the Order seems to me to be immaterial. It is no answer, when a man says ‘I have been unlawfully arrested without a warrant,’ to say ‘Well, had I (the person making the arrest) taken the trouble to go and ask for a warrant, I would undoubtedly have got it.’ That would be no answer to a claim for unlawful arrest. Similarly here, although the [immigration officers] could have detained the plaintiff by refusing him leave to land, that does not entitle them to detain him on the grounds on which they did.’
The judge awarded damages of andpound;150 even though ‘no pecuniary damage [had] been suffered’ on the basis that it was ‘a fair figure which will vindicate the plaintiff’s rights without amounting to a vindictive award’.

Judges:

Barry J

Citations:

[1958] 1 QB 496

Statutes:

Aliens Order 1953 2(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
CitedBostridge v Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust CA 10-Feb-2015
The claimant had been detained as a mental patient, but it was accepted that that detention had been unlawful as to over 400 days. The respondent argued that since he might have been detained in any event under other powers, he should receive only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Damages

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.431210

Cameron and others v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd: QBD 18 May 2006

The claimant sought damages from the defendant after the death of her father in the Potters Bar rail crash. The defendant applied for summary judgment saying that English law did not recognise a claim by a family member of a deceased save through the claim of the estate itself. The claimant said that this would deny her human rights, and sought a declaration of incompatibility with regard to s1A of the 1976 Act.
Held: ‘It is within the reasonable margin of appreciation of the State to limit those who are entitled to claim compensation to those who are financially dependent on the deceased. Who otherwise should say where the line should be drawn between those who may claim from those who may not? ‘ The claimants had also lost any possibility of a claim through limitation.

Citations:

Times 14-Jun-2006, [2006] EWHC 1133 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Railways (Safety Case) Regulations 2000, Human Rights Act 1998, Fatal Accidents Act 1976 1A, Railways Act 1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedTakoushis, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Coroner for Inner North London and others CA 30-Nov-2005
Relatives sought judicial review of the coroner’s decision not to allow a jury, and against allowance of an expert witness. The deceased had been a mental patient but had been arrested with a view to being hospitalised. He was taken first to the . .
CitedMiddleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury.
CitedFoster and others v British Gas plc ECJ 12-Jul-1990
The defendants (BGC) were nationalised suppliers of gas. BGC was by statute a body with a legal persona operating under the supervision of the authorities. Its members were appointed by the Secretary of State, who also determined their remuneration. . .
CitedParochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley, Warwickshire v Wallbank and another HL 26-Jun-2003
Parish Councils are Hybrid Public Authorities
The owners of glebe land were called upon as lay rectors to contribute to the cost of repairs to the local church. They argued that the claim was unlawful by section 6 of the 1998 Act as an act by a public authority incompatible with a Convention . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Human Rights, Personal Injury, Transport, Health and Safety

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.242210

Aerospace Publishing Ltd and Another v Thames Water Utilities Ltd: QBD 13 Jan 2006

Whether respondents liable for damage from leak from mains water pipe – calculation of damages.

Judges:

Holland J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2987 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Water Industry Act 1991

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromAerospace Publishing Ltd and Another v Thames Water Utilities Ltd CA 11-Jan-2007
A substantial private archive of valuable books had been damaged when the defendant’s water mains burst. The court was asked to assess the value.
Held: The water company’s appeal failed save to a small extent. The articles were of substantial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Utilities, Torts – Other, Damages

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.238319

The Kate: 1899

The Kate was totally lost in a collision with the defendants’ ship, whilst on the ballast leg of a charterparty. The issue was whether in a case of total loss as opposed to partial loss of a ship without a cargo, the plaintiffs could recover only the market value of the ship at the time of the loss (as the defendants contended) or the profit lost under the charterparty as well (as the plaintiffs contended).
Sir Francis Jeune P laid it down that the general principle which governs the assessment of damage is ‘restitutio in integrum qualified by the condition that the damage sought to be recovered must not be too remote.’ and also said: ‘Sir Robert Phillimore states that the value should be taken as at the end of the voyage, and therefore lets in freight or interest as an additional compensation . . The present case, which is that of a vessel without cargo, but under charter, being totally lost, is not exactly that contemplated by Sir Robert Phillimore; but it appears to me to follow from his judgment that the value of the vessel may in such case be taken as at the end of her voyage, and something allowed in respect of the period between the time of collision and the end of the voyage . . the profits under the charterparty should take the place of interest, as more accurately representing the loss to the owner, and may fairly be considered to be the equivalent of freight when a cargo is on board. Indeed I can see no distinction in principle between the case of freight when a cargo is on board and . . a charterparty under which cargo is to be taken.’

Citations:

[1899] P 165

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedThe ‘Columbus’ 9-Mar-1849
Where a vessel is sunk in a collision, and compensation is awarded by the Court of Admiralty to the full value of the vessel as for a total loss, the plaintiff will not be able to recover anything in the nature of a demurrage for loss of the . .

Cited by:

CitedMitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd and Another v The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime ComC 12-Sep-2013
In the lead case, Sony’s warehouse at Enfield had been severely damaged in what were said to be riots in August 2011. The court considered preliminary issues as to whether the events constituted a riot within the 1886 Act, and the extent of damages . .
CitedMitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd and Others v Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime CA 20-May-2014
The appellant had suffered damage in a riot, and, under the 1886 Act, the respondent was liable to pay compensation.
Held: The MOPC was liable to pay compensation by way of indemnity. Analysis of section 2(1) suggested compensation for loss . .
CitedThe Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd and Others SC 20-Apr-2016
The Court considered the quantification of damages to be awarded to a business suffering under riots under the 1886 Act, and in particular whether such recoverable losses included compensation for consequential losses, including loss of profits and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Damages

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.608294

Wallace and others v Manchester City Council: CA 23 Jul 1998

Damages payable to a tenant for a landlord’s failure to repair whilst the tenant remained in the property were not separate damages for discomfort and diminution in rental value since these amounted to the same thing: ‘for periods when the tenant remains in occupation of the property, notwithstanding the breach of the obligation to repair, the loss to him requiring compensation is a loss of comfort and convenience that results from living in a property that was not in the state of repair it ought to have been in if the landlord had performed his obligation’ and ‘Thus the question to be answered is what sum is required to compensate the tenant for the distress and inconvenience experienced because of the landlord’s failure to perform his obligation to repair? Such sum may be ascertained in a number of different ways, including, but not limited to a notional reduction in the rent. Some Judges may prefer to use that method alone (McCoy v Clarke), some may prefer a global award for discomfort and inconvenience (Calabar and Chiodi), and others prefer a mixture of the two (Sturoloson v Mauroux and Brent LBC v Carmel). But in my judgment they are not bound to assess damages separately under heads of both diminution in value and discomfort. Whilst in cases within the third proposition these heads are alternative ways of expressing the same concept.’
The essence of calculating of quantum is that it is a contractual claim, not one in tort. The court sets out to quantify the difference in value between the disprepaired property and the property as it would be if the landlord had fulfilled the repairing obligation. Discomfort and inconvenience for the tenant are a part of this head, not a separate, tortious, head of damages.

Judges:

Morritt LJ

Citations:

Times 23-Jul-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1166, [1998] 3 EGLR 38, [1998] 30 HLR 1111

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCalabar Properties Ltd v Stitcher CA 1983
The landlord had failed in his duty to repair. One tenant’s health suffered because of the damp, and they had to rent other premises.
Held: The landlord has only a reasonable time to effect repairs once he has been given notice of the need for . .

Cited by:

CitedNiazi Services Ltd v Johannes Marinus Henricus Van Der Loo CA 10-Feb-2004
The tenant counterclaimed an action by the landlord for rent saying the property had not been repaired under the landlord’s covenant. The water supply had for 33 months been weak, leading to only a trickle of water being available, and there had . .
CitedEnglish Churches Housing Group v Shine CA 7-Apr-2004
The claimant was a secure tenant of English Churches Housing Group. He was unemployed and lived on benefits. He claimed damages against his landlord for breaches of the repairing covenants implied by section 11. The court considerd the appropriate . .
CitedRegus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd CA 15-Apr-2008
The appellant had contracted to provide office accomodation to the defendant. The air conditioning did not work and there were other defects. The appellant now challenged a finding of liability and that its contract terms which were said to totally . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Damages

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.90262

UYB Ltd v British Railways Board: CA 15 Nov 2000

When disallowing interest on a claim, the judge refused to allow the admission of the plaintiff’s expert report on quantum, dated two years before the writ, in rebuttal of the respondent’s assertion, that they had not known of the amount claimed until immediately before the action.
Held: The draft had been marked without prejudice, and it was against public policy to discourage attempts to settle actions without litigation by allowing reference to such documents. The draft remained a draft, and the figures were in fact different from those ultimately disclosed. The judge was correct not to allow the report to be admitted.

Citations:

Times 15-Nov-2000, Gazette 02-Nov-2000, Gazette 09-Nov-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 265

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Damages

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.90095

Van Oudenhoven v Griffin Inns Ltd: CA 4 Apr 2000

When awarding damages to a claimant who lived abroad, it would not be correct to apply a lower discount rate, so as to award a higher level of damages to reflect the different taxation regime in that country which would take a greater share of the damages. This was not an exceptional circumstance which would allow departure from the rule.

Judges:

Lord Justice Tuckey, Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Stuart-Smith

Citations:

Times 10-Apr-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 102, [2000] All ER (D) 463

Links:

Gazette, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.90121

Steadman v Scholfield and Another: QBD 6 May 1992

A jet ski is neither a boat nor a vessel. The maritime limitation rules did not therefore apply to an accident involving a jet ski. The applicant could therefore claim full damages.

Citations:

Gazette 06-May-1992

Statutes:

Marine Conventions Act 1911

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages, Transport

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89518

Southampton Container Terminals Ltd v Hansa Schiffahrts GmbH (The Maersk Colombo): CA 3 May 2001

The claimants operated the container terminal in Southampton. A crane was struck and damaged beyond repair by the defendants’ vessel. The crane was not replaced because before the casualty the claimants had ordered two new cranes. Loss of use of the damaged crane before the new cranes were delivered had caused some inconvenience, but no measurable financial loss. Nevertheless, the claimants asked for the replacement loss of the damaged crane (andpound;2.395 million) being the agreed cost of buying, modifying and transporting a second-hand crane from the United States. The judge only awarded the agreed resale value of the crane in Southampton (andpound;665,000).
Held: Unless compelled by authority to do so, the cost of reinstatement by reference to transportation and modification costs, which had not and would never be incurred and which it would be unreasonable to incur, could not fairly be regarded as caused by the defendants’ tort The court reviewed the authorities and accepted the following (1) On proof of the tortious destruction of a chattel, the owner is prima facie entitled to damages reflecting the market value of the chattel ‘as is’. (2) He is so entitled whether or not he intends to obtain a replacement. (3) The market or resale value is to be assessed on the evidence, there being no standard measure applicable to all circumstances.

Judges:

Clarke, Thorpe LJJ and Holland J

Citations:

Times 13-Jun-2001, Gazette 14-Jun-2001, [2001] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 275, [2001] EWCA Civ 717

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAli Reza-Delta Transport Co Ltd v United Arab Shipping Co Sag CA 2-May-2003
Substantial items of equipment had been destroyed in Saudi Arabia, and needed to be valued.
Held: The valuation had to include the time and place of its destruction. Accordingly the valuation correctly calculated the loss by asking for the . .
CitedCrouch v King’s Healthcare NHS Trust CA 15-Oct-2004
The defendants sought approval of their practice of making a written offer to the claimants rather than making a payment into court. The offer had been accepted but only after the defendant had purported to withdraw it.
Held: ‘it certainly is . .
CitedAerospace Publishing Ltd and Another v Thames Water Utilities Ltd CA 11-Jan-2007
A substantial private archive of valuable books had been damaged when the defendant’s water mains burst. The court was asked to assess the value.
Held: The water company’s appeal failed save to a small extent. The articles were of substantial . .
CitedR+V Versicherung Ag v Risk Insurance and Reinsurance Solutions Sa and others ComC 27-Jan-2006
It had held that the defendant insurance intermediaries were liable to the claimants, a German reinsurance company, because of a conspiracy to defraud the claimants on the part of one of the defendants’ employees. The court had to decide issues of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89419

Lambert v Lewis: HL 1981

A farmer was sued when a towing hitch on his Landrover came loose, releasing the trailer which then caused a serious accident. When sued for the damage, the farmer brought proceedings against the garage proprietor who supplied the towing hitch, relying on the warranty. By the time the accident occurred, the farmer had been aware that the locking mechanism on the towing hitch was faulty, but he had continued to use it.
Held: The farmer’s claim against the garage was rejected.
Lord Diplock said: ‘I would accept that in the case of the coupling the warranty was still continuing up to the date, some three to six months before the accident, when it first became known to the farmer that the handle of the locking mechanism was missing. Up to that time the farmer would have had a right to rely upon the dealers warranty as excusing him from making his own examination of the coupling to see if it were safe . . After it had become apparent to the farmer that the locking mechanism of the coupling was broken, and consequently that it was no longer in the same state as when it was delivered, the only implied warranty which could justify his failure to take the precaution either to get it mended or at least to find out whether it was safe to continue to use it in that condition, would be a warranty that the coupling could continue to be safely used to tow a trailer on a public highway notwithstanding that it was in an obviously damaged state. My Lords, any implication of a warranty in these terms needs only to be stated, to be rejected . . In the state in which the farmer knew the coupling to be at the time of the accident, there was no longer any warranty by the dealers of its continued safety in use on which the farmer was entitled to rely.
. . The farmer’s liability arose, not from the defective design of the coupling but from his own negligence in failing, when he knew that the coupling was damaged, to have it repaired or to ascertain if it was still safe to use. The issue of causation, therefore, on which the farmer’s claim against the dealers depended, was whether his negligence resulted directly and naturally, in the ordinary course of events from the dealer’s breach of warranty. Manifestly it did not.’

Judges:

Lord Diplock

Citations:

[1982] AC 225, [1981] 1 All ER 1185, [1981] RTR 346, [1981] 2 Lloyds Rep 17, [1981] 2 WLR 713

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBorealis Ab v Geogas Trading Sa ComC 9-Nov-2010
The parties had contracted for sale and purchase of butane for processing. It was said to have been contaminated. The parties now disputed the effect on damages for breach including on causation, remoteness, mitigation and quantum.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Contract

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.425893

Smoker v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority: HL 1991

Pension benefits were held to be the fruits through insurance of moneys set aside in the past in respect of past work and could not be appropriated by a tortfeasor so as to reduce its liability to compensate the victim.

Citations:

[1991] 2 AC 502

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLongden v British Coal Corporation HL 13-Mar-1997
The plaintiff was injured whilst at work in one of the defendant’s collieries. The House considered the deductibility from damages awarded for personal injury of a collateral benefit.
Held: The issue of deductibility where the claim is for . .
CitedKnapton and others v ECC Card Clothing Ltd EAT 7-Mar-2006
EAT Unfair Dismissal: Compensation
Reversing the Employment Tribunal, in the assessment of compensation for unfair dismissal under Employment Rights Act 1996 section 123, an employee who took early receipt . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.237502

Personal Representatives of Tang Man Sit v Capacious Investments Ltd: PC 18 Dec 1995

The claimant, Capacious Investments Ltd, brought proceedings against Tang’s estate for damages for the loss of use and occupation, and also an account of profits and damages for loss and damage incurred, for example by encumbering the property with leases. It obtained an account of profits and an award of compensatory damages as a result of the same breach of trust. The PRs appealed.
Held: The claimant could elect to receive the higher award to which it was entitled but it had to give credit against the damages for loss of use and occupation for the sums received pursuant to the account of profits. Moreover, there was nothing inconsistent between the claim for damage to the property and the claim for damages for loss of use. These were in effect cumulative remedies claimed on a basis which was consistent between themselves.
An action for account is an alternative claim, and is not cumulative to a claim for damages. Courts should distinguish election between remedies from election between rights.
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead ex plained the nature of alternative and cumulative damages awards: ‘The law frequently affords an injured person more than one remedy for the wrong he has suffered. Sometimes the two remedies are alternative and inconsistent. The classic example, indeed, is (1) an account of the profits made by a defendant in breach of his fiduciary obligations and (2) damages for the loss suffered by the plaintiff by reason of the same breach. The former is measured by the wrongdoer’s gain, the latter by the injured party’s loss.
Sometimes the two remedies are cumulative. Cumulative remedies may lie against one person. A person fraudulently induced to enter into a contract may have the contract set aside and also sue for damages. Or there may be cumulative remedies against more than one person. A plaintiff may have a cause of action in negligence against two persons in respect of the same loss.
Alternative remedies
Faced with alternative and inconsistent remedies a plaintiff must choose, or elect, between them. He cannot have both. The basic principle governing when a plaintiff must make his choice is simple and clear. He is required to choose when, but not before, judgment is given in his favour and the judge is asked to make orders against the defendant. A plaintiff is not required to make his choice when he launches his proceedings. He may claim one remedy initially, and then by amendment of his writ and his pleadings abandon that claim in favour of the other. He may claim both remedies, as alternatives. But he must make up his mind when judgment is being entered against the defendant. Court orders are intended to be obeyed. In the nature of things, therefore, the court should not make orders which would afford a plaintiff both of two alternative remedies.
In the ordinary course, by the time the trial is concluded a plaintiff will know which remedy is more advantageous to him. By then, if not before, he will know enough of the facts to assess where his best interests lie. There will be nothing unfair in requiring him to elect at that stage. Occasionally this may not be so. This is more likely to happen when the judgment is a default judgment or a summary judgment than at the conclusion of a trial. A plaintiff may not know how much money the defendant has made from the wrongful use of his property. It may be unreasonable to require the plaintiff to make his choice without further information. To meet this difficulty, the court may make discovery and other orders designed to give the plaintiff the information he needs, and which in fairness he ought to have, before deciding upon his remedy. A recent instance where this was done is the decision of Lightman J. in Island Records Ltd. v. Tring International Plc. [1995] 3 All E.R. 444. The court will take care to ensure that such an order is not oppressive to a defendant.
In the ordinary course the decision made when judgment is entered is made once and for all. That is the normal rule. The order is a final order, and the interests of the parties and the public interest alike dictate that there should be finality. The principle, however, is not rigid and unbending. Like all procedural principles, the established principles regarding election between alternative remedies are not fixed and unyielding rules. These principles are the means to an end, not the end in themselves. They are no more than practical applications of a general and overriding principle governing the conduct of legal proceedings, namely, that proceedings should be conducted in a manner which strikes a fair and reasonable balance between the interests of the parties, having proper regard also to the wider public interest in the conduct of court proceedings. Thus in Johnson v. Agnew [1980] A.C. 367 the House of Lords held that when specific performance fails to be realised, an order for specific performance may subsequently be discharged and an inquiry as to damages ordered. Lord Wilberforce observed, at p. 398: ‘Election, though the subject of much learning and refinement, is in the end a doctrine based on simple considerations of common sense and equity.
Cumulative remedies
The procedural principles applicable to cumulative remedies are necessarily different. Faced with alternative and inconsistent remedies a plaintiff must choose between them. Faced with cumulative remedies a plaintiff is not required to choose. He may have both remedies. He may pursue one remedy or the other remedy or both remedies, just as he wishes. It is a matter for him. He may obtain judgment for both remedies and enforce both judgments. When the remedies are against two different people, he may sue both persons. He may do so concurrently, and obtain judgment against both. Damages to the full value of goods which have been converted may be awarded against two persons for successive conversions of the same goods. Or the plaintiff may sue the two persons successively. He may obtain judgment against one, and take steps to enforce the judgment. This does not preclude him from then suing the other. There are limitations to this freedom. One limitation is the so called rule in Henderson v. Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100. In the interests of fairness and finality a plaintiff is required to bring forward his whole case against a defendant in one action. Another limitation is that the court has power to ensure that, when fairness so requires, claims against more than one person shall all be tried and decided together. A third limitation is that a plaintiff cannot recover in the aggregate from one or more defendants an amount in excess of his loss. Part satisfaction of a judgment against one person does not operate as a bar to the plaintiff thereafter bringing an action against another who is also liable, but it does operate to reduce the amount recoverable in the second action. However, once a plaintiff has fully recouped his loss, of necessity he cannot thereafter pursue any other remedy he might have and which he might have pursued earlier. Having recouped the whole of his loss, any further proceedings would lack a subject matter. This principle of full satisfaction prevents double recovery.’

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead

Citations:

Gazette 07-Feb-1996, Times 26-Dec-1995, [1996] AC 514, [1995] UKPC 54, [1996] 1 All ER 193, [1996] 2 WLR 192

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

CitedHenderson v Henderson 20-Jul-1843
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation
The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings.
Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule . .
CitedJohnson v Agnew HL 1979
The seller had obtained a summary order for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land against the buyer.
Held: The breach was continuing and was still capable of being remedied by compliance with the order for specific . .
CitedIsland Records Ltd v Tring International Plc and Another ChD 12-Apr-1995
A copyright plaintiff may delay the choice of his remedy between damages and account of profits until information was available from the defendant which would allow him to gauge which remedy suited him best. The court may make the orders necessary . .

Cited by:

CitedWestminster City Council v Porter and Another ChD 30-Jul-2002
The claimant authority sought compensation from the respondents for acts committed whilst she had been a councillor. The auditor had certified that the respondents had caused losses amounting to 31 million pounds.
Held: Summary judgement was . .
CitedOliver Ashworth (Holdings) Limited v Ballard (Kent) Limited CA 18-Mar-1999
In order for the landlord to claim double rent where a tenant held over unlawfully after the tenancy was determined, the landlord must not do anything to indicate that the lease might be continuing, for example by denying the validity of break . .
CitedHeaton and Others v AXA Equity and Law Life Assurance Society plc and Another HL 25-Apr-2002
The claimant had settled one claim in full and final satisfaction against one party, but then sought further damages from the defendant, for issues related to a second but linked contract. The defendant claimed the benefit of the settlement.
CitedRamzan v Brookwide Ltd CA 19-Aug-2011
The defendant had broken through into a neighbour’s flying freehold room, closed it off, and then included it in its own premises for let. It now appealed against the quantum of damages awarded. The judge had found the actions deliberate and with a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Commonwealth

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.84679

Murrell v Healy and Another: CA 5 Apr 2001

Documents held by an insurance company after settling a personal injuries claim by the same claimant but as regards a later unconnected claim were admissible, since they went to an issue in the later case, namely the nature and extent of the injury from the first occasion. They were admissible even though they had been used as part of without prejudice negotiations.

Judges:

Waller, Dyson LJJ

Citations:

Times 01-May-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 486, [2001] 4 All ER 345, [2002] RTR 2

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.84140

Nationwide Building Society v Various Solicitors (No 3): ChD 1 Mar 1999

Equitable compensation for breach of fiduciary duty was the actual loss suffered. Would he have acted differently but for the act? Where bad faith or worse shown any contribution of fault by the claimant would be disregarded.

Citations:

Gazette 03-Mar-1999, Times 01-Mar-1999, [1999] EWHC 844 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.84234

Jones (A Minor) v Wilkins (Wynn and Another, Third Parties): CA 6 Feb 2001

Where a child had not been properly restrained by a seat belt, the damages should be reduced but not by a great percentage. Here, although the child was partially restrained by sharing her mother’s lap belt, in fact this had made the injuries worse. Nevertheless, the genuine cause of the accident was the defendant’s driving, and the damages should not be reduced by more than 25%. Froom v Butcher remained valuable guidance. Although it was decided under the earlier Act, the wording in the new Act was strikingly similar.

Citations:

Gazette 15-Feb-2001, Times 06-Feb-2001, [2000] EWCA Civ 3024, [2001] PIQR P12, [2001] RTR 19

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Liability (Contributions) Act 1978 2(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedFroom v Butcher CA 21-Jul-1975
The court asked what reduction if any should be made to a plaintiff’s damages where injuries were caused not only by the defendant’s negligent driving but also by the failure of the plaintiff to wear a seat belt. It had been submitted that, since . .

Cited by:

CitedWilliams v Williams (The Estate of) CA 30-Apr-2013
A child aged three had been injured as a passenger in her mother’s car when it was hit by another negligently driven vehicle. The mother appealed against a finding that she was 25% contributorily negligent in that the child seat used had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82585

In Re Park Air Services Plc; Christopher Moran Holdings Ltd v Bairstow and Another: HL 4 Feb 1999

The tenant company went into liquidation, the receiver disclaimed the lease, and the landlord claimed compensation under the Act. The question concerned how the compensation was to be calculated.
Held: Where a solvent tenant under an onerous lease goes into voluntary liquidation, and the liquidator disclaims the lease, the right to payment of rent disappears, and the landlord is entitled to compensation only, by payment discounted for acceleration.
The court had to calculate the compensation according to general principles. It was a statutory right where any common law or contractual rights were extinguished by the disclaimer. The right replaced any rights which would have arisen under the lease. The receiver said that the damages should be reduced to allow for the fact of the acceleration of the receipts. He was correct. The Court of Appeal had been wrong to treat the freeholder as a secured creditor making a voluntary proof. His claim was for the statutory right of compensation, not any made under the lease itself. The common law right to damages was lost on the disclaimer. Appeal allowed, but with a discount of 5.5% to the accelerated rent.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett

Citations:

Times 05-Feb-1999, [1999] UKHL 2, [2000] 2 AC 172, [1999] 1 All ER 673, [1999] 2 WLR 396, [2000] ANZ Conv R 174, [1999] 1 EGLR 1, [1999] 1 BCLC 155

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 178(6), Insolvency Act 1986 178, Insolvency Rules 1986 4.88(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHindcastle Ltd v Barbara Attenborough Associates Ltd and Others HL 22-Feb-1996
The guarantor of an original tenant under the lease remains liable after the disclaimer the lease on insolvency. The disclaimer operates to determine the lease altogether with the result that the landlord’s reversion is accelerated. ‘In order to . .
Appeal fromPark Air Services Plc; Christopher Moran Holdings Limited v Bairstow and Ruddock CA 1-May-1997
If a lease is determined or treated as determined in a winding up or in a bankruptcy, the landlord is entitled to prove in principle for all the rent and other payments which he would have been entitled to recover from the tenant for the residue of . .
CitedEx parte Llynvi Coal and Iron Co; In re Hide 1871
The trustee in bankruptcy disclaimed an agreement for a lease under Section 23. The landlord claimed to prove as creditor under the section.
Held: Where one party has repudiated a contract and the other party has accepted that repudiation as . .
CitedPhoto Production Ltd v Securicor Transport Ltd HL 14-Feb-1980
Interpretation of Exclusion Clauses
The plaintiffs had contracted with the defendants for the provision of a night patrol service for their factory. The perils the parties had in mind were fire and theft. A patrol man deliberately lit a fire which burned down the factory. It was an . .
CitedOverstone Ltd v Shipway 1962
Where a claimed loss will be suffered over a period in the future, the computation will have to make allowance for any advancement that has occurred. . .
CitedIn re London and Colonial Co.; Horsey’s claim 1868
. .
CitedIn re New Oriental Bank Corporation (No.2) 1895
Where a tenancy continues after the insolvency of the tenant, the landlord is entitled (i) to prove for all the arrears of rent; (ii) to enter a claim for all future rent; and (iii) as rent accrues due, to submit proofs in the liquidation from time . .
CitedHardy v Fothergill 1888
Rent falling due after a winding up of the tenant was a future debt for which the landlord could have proved in the tenant’s liquidation. . .
CitedIn re Metropolis Estates Co Ltd CA 1940
. .
CitedOppenheimer v British and Foreign Exchange and Investment Bank 1877
A court can give a liquidator leave to distribute, thus protecting him from any risk of personal liability, but only if he retained a sum sufficient when invested at compound interest to fund future liabilities. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Damages, Insolvency

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82112

Island Records Ltd v Tring International Plc and Another: ChD 12 Apr 1995

A copyright plaintiff may delay the choice of his remedy between damages and account of profits until information was available from the defendant which would allow him to gauge which remedy suited him best. The court may make the orders necessary for such discovery.

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

Times 28-Apr-1995, [1995] EWHC 8 (Ch), [1995] FSR 560, [1995] 3 All ER 444

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPersonal Representatives of Tang Man Sit v Capacious Investments Ltd PC 18-Dec-1995
The claimant, Capacious Investments Ltd, brought proceedings against Tang’s estate for damages for the loss of use and occupation, and also an account of profits and damages for loss and damage incurred, for example by encumbering the property with . .
CitedRamzan v Brookwide Ltd CA 19-Aug-2011
The defendant had broken through into a neighbour’s flying freehold room, closed it off, and then included it in its own premises for let. It now appealed against the quantum of damages awarded. The judge had found the actions deliberate and with a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82432

Focsa Services (UK) Ltd v Birkett: EAT 30 Jan 1996

An IT was wrong to calculate damages for breach of contract as if it was a finding of unfair dismissal.
Clark J said: ‘The fallacy in our judgment, in the chairman’s reasoning is to disregard the normal common law rules as to loss in cases of wrongful dismissal. That loss is limited to the sums payable to the employee had the employment been lawfully terminated under the contract. Once a dismissal has taken place, as was accepted and found in this case, it is irrelevant to consider what might have happened had a contractual disciplinary procedure been followed. An employer is entitled to dismiss on contractual notice at common law for whatever reason.
The fact is that Mr Birkett was dismissed. In so far as he did not receive his full notice, he is generally entitled to damages to reflect the pay during the notice period and no more. The only exception is where employment would have been extended by operating the disciplinary procedure: Boyo v London Borough of Lambeth [1995] IRLR 50; Gunton v London Borough of Richmond-upon-Thames [1980] IRLR 321 . .’

Judges:

Clark J

Citations:

Gazette 10-Jul-1996, (1996) IRLR 325, [1996] UKEAT 826 – 95 – 3001

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedEdwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust QBD 31-Jul-2009
The claimant, a consultant surgeon had been subject to disciplinary proceedings by his employer. They were however conducted in a manner which breached his contract. The GMC had summarily dismissed the same allegations. The claimant now appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80619

Griffiths and Others v British Coal Corporation and Another: CA 27 Feb 2001

The interest payable on an award of damages for past loss of earnings for personal injury was liable to be subject to the deduction rules applying in respect of benefits paid. Such interest fell within the definition of ‘compensation for earnings lost’ as defined in the Act.

Citations:

Times 13-Mar-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 336

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997 Sch 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Personal Injury, Benefits

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.81044

Edmunds v Simmonds: QBD 4 Oct 2000

The claimant suffered damages in a road traffic accident in Spain caused by the respondent. A Spanish court would have allowed much lower damages. Such damages should normally be assessed in accordance with the law of the country where the accident happened, but the Act allowed other applicable law to be considered. In this case, both claimant and defendant lived in England, and the majority of damage transpired in England, and the court could and would calculate damages to English standards. The issue was a procedural one, and survived the change in law.
Gartland J said: ‘Even if I had not decided the section 12 point in the claimant’s favour, I would, unless persuaded that Spanish law did not recognise any head of damage recoverable by the claimant, have decided that quantification was purely procedural and should be carried out according to English law in any event.’

Judges:

Gartland J

Citations:

Times 21-Nov-2000, [2001] 1WLR 1003

Statutes:

Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 9, 11

Cited by:

CitedHarding v Wealands CA 17-Dec-2004
The claimant sought damages here for a road traffic accident which had occurred in Australia. The defendant was working in England. The defendant argued that the law of New South Wales applied.
Held: The general rule in section 11 was not to . .
CitedRoerig v Valiant Trawlers Ltd CA 28-Jan-2002
The claimant who was Dutch, was a widow of a fisherman who had died at sea. The question on appeal was ‘in assessing damages for loss of dependency should benefits resulting from the loss be deducted from the damages?’ The claimant’s position under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80259

Director of Buildings and Lands v Shun Fung Ironworks Ltd: PC 20 Feb 1995

Compensation is payable for losses properly anticipating resumption of possession of the land. The principle of equivalence gives rise to the statutory right to interest under section 11(1). The council explained the conceptual foundation of the discounted cash flow basis of calculation: ‘In this calculation the discount rate, or capitalisation rate, comprises the rate at which an amount of money payable at a future date should be reduced to arrive at its present value. Its present value is the price which a person would pay now for the right or prospect of receiving the amount of money in question at the future date. Three ingredients can be identified in the discount rate. One is the rate of return the potential purchaser would expect on his money, assuming that the payment to him at the future date is free of risk. A second ingredient is the allowance the potential purchaser would make because of the likely impact of inflation. He is buying today, in today’s currency, the right to be paid at a future date an amount which, when paid, will be paid in tomorrow’s depreciated currency. The third ingredient is the risk factor. The greater the risk that the purchaser will not receive in due course the future payments he is buying, the higher the rate of return he will require.’

Judges:

Lord Nicholls, Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Mustill, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Lloyd of Berwick

Citations:

Times 27-Feb-1995, [1995] 2 AC 111

Links:

PC

Statutes:

Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 11(1)

Cited by:

CitedHalstead v Council of City of Manchester CA 23-Oct-1997
Land had been compulsorily purchased, and the compensation agreed, but after long delays in payment, not as to the calculation of interest.
Held: Interest would be payable from the date of entry. The limitation period arose only once the . .
CitedMohammed Aslam v South Bedfordshire District Council CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimant appealed an award of the Lands Tribunal of compensation for an order discontinuing his use as a slaughterhouse of premises of which he held a long lease. The tribunal had applied a discount for wastage on sheep carcasses of 25%, but had . .
CitedFaraday v Carmarthenshire County Council CA 10-May-2004
The claimant appealed against an award of compensation on the compulsory acquisition of his land by the defendant.
Held: The award was incorrect. The authority had wrongly deducted a sum in respect of ‘freed up time’ – which would have allowed . .
CitedRyde International Plc v London Regional Transport CA 5-Mar-2004
The landowner had developed land which was then made the subject of compulsory purchase. The court was asked how the compensation was to be calculated. The landowner expected to sell the development as a whole. The respondent argued that the profit . .
CitedMoto Hospitality Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport CA 26-Jul-2007
The company sought damages to its business on a motorway service station when works closed an access road.
Held: The Secretary of State’s appeal succeeded. A claim for compensation under section 10 had not been established, at least in respect . .
CitedStar Energy Weald Basin Ltd and Another v Bocardo Sa SC 28-Jul-2010
The defendant had obtained a licence to extract oil from its land. In order to do so it had to drill out and deep under the Bocardo’s land. No damage at all was caused to B’s land at or near the surface. B claimed in trespass for damages. It now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Commonwealth, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79977

Coxon v Flintshire County Council: CA 13 Feb 2001

The guidelines on damages for psychiatric damage did not apply to the damages claims of those who had been subjected to sexual abuse whilst children in local authority care homes. The injury in these cases was of a different character, and the Judicial Studies Board guidance could not be applied simply. In these cases there was often suffering over many years, and the injury was not a compounding of a pre-existing condition.

Citations:

Times 13-Mar-2001, Gazette 29-Mar-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 302

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedA v The Archbishop of Birmingham QBD 30-Jun-2005
Assessment of damages following child abuse by Catholic priest.
Held: General damages of andpound;50,000 were in line with Coxon and were approved. A had not been shown to be, and is not, incapable of managing his affairs. The court differed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79589

Corporacion Nacional Del Cobre: ChD 13 Dec 1996

No defence of contributory negligence was to be allowed against a claim involving an allegation of corruption by means of bribery. The defendants had bribed one of the plaintiff’s employees. The plaintiff claimed restitution, and an account from the defendants as constructive trustees for profits. The defendants wanted to assert that there was an equivalent to contributory negligence within the law of equity. There was no proper reason for distinguishing deceit by bribery from other forms of deceit. There had to be something to have put the plaintiff on notice of the deceit, and that was absent here.

Citations:

Gazette 13-Dec-1996

Damages, Equity

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79515

Channel Island Ferries Ltd v Cenargo Navigation Ltd (The Rozel): QBD 5 Apr 1994

Arbitrator to award all costs even if award much less than original claim.
Phillips J said: ‘It is always necessary to exercise the greatest care before applying the reasoning in one case to a different factual situation, and this is particularly true in the field of damages. The majority of the Court in Ruxley Electronics did not hold that a plaintiff can recover in damages the cost of remedial measures which are unreasonable. They held that, in the circumstances of that case it was not unreasonable for the plaintiff to spend the substantial sum necessary to have what he had contracted for. The test of what was reasonable had to have regard to his personal preference, as expressed in the depth of water that he had contractually required. This reasoning can be applied to a requirement which is incorporated in a contract as an end in itself, reflecting a personal preference of the contracting party. It does not apply where the contractual requirement is not an end in itself, but is inserted into a commercial contract because it has financial implications. If, in such a case, the contractual requirement is not met, the costs of remedial measures will not normally be recoverable as damages if they are disproportionate to the financial consequences of the breach. If that is the case it will not be reasonable to incur those costs. The damages recoverable will be those necessary to compensate for the financial consequences of the breach.’

Judges:

Phillips J

Citations:

Times 05-Apr-1994, [1994] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 161

Citing:

CitedRuxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyth CA 7-Jan-1994
In 1986, the defendant, wanted a swimming pool adjoining his house. He contracted with the plaintiffs. The contract price for the pool, with certain extras, was 17,797.40 pounds including VAT. The depth of the pool was to be 6 ft 6 in at the deep . .

Cited by:

CitedRuxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyth HL 29-Jun-1995
Damages on Construction not as Agreed
The appellant had contracted to build a swimming pool for the respondent, but, after agreeing to alter the specification to construct it to a certain depth, in fact built it to the original lesser depth, Damages had been awarded to the house owner . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Damages, Construction

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78974

Chiron Corporation and Others v Murex Diagnostics Ltd (No 11): ChD 15 Mar 1996

A large interim award of damages can be proper if it is less than the likely damages which would be awarded at trial despite their remaining outstanding issues of fact to be decided.

Citations:

Times 15-Mar-1996

Citing:

See AlsoChiron Corporation and Others v Murex Diagnostics Ltd CA 14-Oct-1994
ECJ judgments make a UK court functus officio only after their full judgment has been delivered. Where judgment had already been given, it was no longer possible for the defendant in an action to seek a reference to the European Court on refusal of . .
See AlsoChiron Corporation v Organon Teknika (No 2) CA 1993
Section 44 could be used in a patent contract dispute even though the patent at issue was governed by the law of a foreign state which would not itself have applied that section. . .
See AlsoChiron Corporation v Organon Teknika Ltd; Same v Murex Diagnostics (No 7) ChD 17-Feb-1994
The issue of loss in a prior patent challenge is res judicata in later proceedings despite the presence of experimental difficulties leading to ipossibly severe time limits. A patent applicant has no duty to inform the Patent Office of matters . .

Cited by:

See AlsoChiron Corporation and Others v Murex Diagnostics Ltd CA 14-Oct-1994
ECJ judgments make a UK court functus officio only after their full judgment has been delivered. Where judgment had already been given, it was no longer possible for the defendant in an action to seek a reference to the European Court on refusal of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79096

Burke v Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh National Health Service Trust: OHCS 8 Jun 1998

A 26 year old man who had no pre-existing condition sustained damage to his lumbar spine in a fall. He suffered from constant lumbar pain and also sudden shooting pains through his left buttock and thigh to his knee. He developed an abnormal pain disorder, and was forced to retire from work on medical grounds about nine months after his accident.
Held: Where an accident victim had a pre-disposition to suffer pain and inability to work despite absence of actual physical cause, the psychological damage was claimable in damages.

Citations:

Times 08-Jun-1998, 1999 SLT 539

Cited by:

CitedIseabal Emslie v Anne Bell OHCS 12-Aug-2004
The defender had driven into the back of the pursuer’s car, causing the injuries. She claimed that the accident had aggravated a pre-existing slight injury to her knee.
Held: The pursuer’s accounts of her injuries had not been entirely . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Scotland, Damages

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78751

Margaret Patricia Briody v St Helens and Knowlsey Heath Authority: QBD 21 Jan 2000

The claimant having become unable to have children through the negligence of the Authority, claimed in damages the cost of arranging a paid surrogacy arrangement abroad. Such arrangements here were void and unenforceable, and it would be against public policy to award them. In this case, the chances of success were also still very small. Such a claim, properly made might be recoverable under other circumstances.

Judges:

The Hon. Mrs Justice Ebsworth Dbe

Citations:

Gazette 03-Feb-2000, Times 01-Mar-2000, [2000] EWHC QB 178

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed toBriody v St Helens and Knowlsey Area Health Authority CA 29-Jun-2001
The appellant had claimed and been awarded damages for a negligently performed caesarean operation. She had been refused damages for the cost of later going to California to go through a commercial surrogacy procedure.
Held: Such claims were . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromBriody v St Helens and Knowlsey Area Health Authority CA 29-Jun-2001
The appellant had claimed and been awarded damages for a negligently performed caesarean operation. She had been refused damages for the cost of later going to California to go through a commercial surrogacy procedure.
Held: Such claims were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Professional Negligence, Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78586

Barry v Ablerex Construction (Midlands) Ltd: CA 30 Mar 2001

It was appropriate to reduce the interest discount rate used to calculate damages awards in personal injury cases for future losses, from 3 per cent to 2 per cent. This reflected the general reduction in such interest rates since the Act came into effect. The House of Lords had set down guidelines for the discount rate to be applied on the award of damages for future losses. The decision had been expressed to apply only until the Act was put into effect. The parties sought to argue that they were not bound since the limitation was not essential to the decision, and the Lord Chancellor was thought to be about to announce a rate under the Act. The Court of Appeal stated that whilst guidelines were not immutable principles of law, they were clearly to be applied, and the time scale, set down in the judgement, was just as much part of the guidelines as the rate.

Judges:

Hnry, Judge, Hale LJJ

Citations:

Times 03-Apr-2001, Gazette 01-Jun-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 433

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Damages Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromBarry v Ablerex Construction (Midlands) Ltd QBD 22-Mar-2000
After a delay of delay 5 years, the judge deducted two years interest from the award to reflect the plaintiff’s delay. . .
CitedWells v Wells; Thomas v Brighton Health Authority; etc HL 16-Jul-1998
In each of three cases, the plaintiffs had suffered serious injury. They complained that the court had made a substantial reduction of their damages award for loss of future earnings and the costs of future care.
Held: The appeals succeeded. . .

Cited by:

CitedEagle (By Her Litigation Friend) v Chambers CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been severely injured, and a substantial damages award made. Cross appeals were heard as to the several elements awarded. The claimant sought as part of her award of damages for personal injuries the fees she would have to pay to . .
CitedTortolano v Ogilvie Construction Ltd SCS 21-Feb-2013
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice, Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78259

Barret Mckenzie and Co Ltd v Escada (UK) Ltd: QBD 1 Feb 2001

The court considered the method of calculation of compensation payable to a commercial agent on termination of the agency. The directive provided that the agent should be compensated, not indemnified, and the way an English court calculated compensation need not follow other European jurisdictions. A tariff system would be unfair, and the court must make allowance for the amounts expended by the agent. Accordingly it would be unjust to base the compensation on the gross return, but it should rather be based upon the net income of the agency.

Judges:

Bowers J

Citations:

Times 15-May-2001, [2001] EWHC QB 462, [2001] EuLR 567, [2001] All ER (D) 78

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 No 3053

Citing:

CitedKing v T Tunnock Limited IHCS 2000
The pursuer had been employed as a commercial agent by the defendant which carried on business as a baker. The pursuer sold only the defendant’s cakes and biscuits. The defendant decided to close its bakery business. The claimant sought compensation . .

Cited by:

CitedLonsdale (T/A Lonsdale Agencies) v Howard and Hallam Ltd HL 4-Jul-2007
The claimant sought compensation after his commercial agency was terminated. The court had found that the agency was declining in turnover, and reduced the compensation accordingly. There had been no written agreement for the agency, and six months’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agency, Commercial, European, Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78249

Balmoral Group Ltd v Rae: EAT 25 Jan 2000

Where a tribunal looked to assess compensation for unfair dismissal, and issues of causation arose, the tribunal should take a broad approach looking fairly at what was just and equitable looking at the claimant’s loss and the extent to which the loss was attributable to the employer. It would normally be wrong to seek to apply considerations appropriate in other contexts such as forseeability, and remoteness of damage.

Citations:

Times 25-Jan-2000

Employment, Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78126

Aylwen v Taylor Joynson Garrett: CA 19 Jul 2001

The claimant sought damages for negligence against solicitors for failing to complete a purchase and to keep her informed of all relevant matters. She sought damages for the loss of the profit she might have made had she purchased the property and resold it. The solicitors applied for and were granted summary judgment against her on the basis that the losses were to be assessed at the date of the negligence alleged, and that she therefore had no losses as such. She could have invested the money she had not spent in other property.
Held: Her appeal was dismissed. There was no evidence that the property was in any way unique, nor that she could not have invested her money in other property.

Judges:

Arden LJ

Citations:

Gazette 19-Jul-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1171

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoAylwen v Taylor Joynson Garrett (A Firm) CA 21-Feb-2001
. .

Cited by:

CitedSawyer v Atari Interactive Inc CA 2-Mar-2007
The claimant designed games software and complained of infringements by the defendant of licensing agreements by failing to allow audits as required.
Held: The defendant should be allowed to be heard on the standard practices for management of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Damages, Professional Negligence

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78035

Minister of Pensions v Chennell: 1946

Judges:

Denning J

Citations:

[1947] KB 250, [1946] 2 All ER 719

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHeskell v Continental Express Ltd 1950
The court discussed how a warranty of authority could arise in an agent: ‘An agent who warrants that he has authority need warrant no more than the bare fact. In the absence of special circumstances, he makes no warranty or representation about how . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.617224

Phillips v Ward: CA 1956

A negligent survey had been provided to prospective purchasers of a house. It would have cost andpound;7,000 to put the property into the condition in which it had been described in the report.
Held: The correct measure of damages was not andpound;7,000 but andpound;4,000. The latter figure represented the difference between the value of the property as it should have been described at the time of its acquisition and its value as described.
Denning LJ stated that: ‘The general principle of English law is that damages must be assessed at the date when the damage occurred, which is usually the same day as the cause of action arises . . ‘ and ‘The proper measure of damages is . . the difference between the value in its assumed good condition and the value in the bad condition which should have been reported to the client.’

Judges:

Denning LJ

Citations:

[1956] 1 WLR 471, [1956] 1 All ER 874

Cited by:

CitedDowns and Another v Chappell and Another CA 3-Apr-1996
The plaintiffs had suceeded in variously establishing claims in deceit and negligence, but now appealed against the finding that no damages had flowed from the wrongs. They had been sold a business on the basis of incorrect figures.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Professional Negligence

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.567831

M (a child) v Leeds Health Authority: QBD 2002

The claimant, her brother and her parents had lived in a detached house before the relevant negligence occurred, but thereafter had moved into a bungalow purchased and adapted to meet her needs. The defendant sought to deduct, during the period (to the age of 25 years) for which the claimant was expected to share the house with her family, the value to the claimant’s parents of having a house provided free of charge for the whole family.
Held: The argument was rejected: ‘I come back to the basic proposition, which is that this is a compensation claim made on behalf of M. It is intended to compensate her for the effects of her disability. While she, for the purposes of this calculation, notionally lives at home with her parents until the age of 25, it seems to me that she is in no different position from any child who could not reasonably be expected to go out into the market place and buy accommodation.’
The defendant argued also for a deduction of the value of the property that, if the claimant had not been injured, she would have been likely to have purchased herself when she left home. Sullivan J accepted that such a deduction was appropriate from the time when the claimant could have been expected to leave the family home and acquire her own accommodation.

Judges:

Sullivan J

Citations:

[2002] PIQR Q46

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.567516

Burke v LFOT Pty Ltd: 18 Apr 2002

(High Court of Australia) Trade and commerce – Damages – Equitable contribution – Liability to pay damages under ss 75B, 82, 87 of Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) for breach of s 52 of the Act – Whether solicitor who gave negligent advice should contribute to the loss suffered by his client as a consequence of another’s misrepresentation which loss could have been avoided by careful advice by the solicitor – Whether equitable maxims prevent requirement of contribution.
Equity – Equitable contribution – Scope of – Requirement of co-ordinate liability – Whether solicitor who gave negligent advice should contribute to loss suffered by client as a consequence of another’s representation where the loss could have been avoided by careful advice by the solicitor.
Contribution – Equitable contribution – Scope of and availability – Co-ordinate liability – Requirements of – Whether compatible with the obligations imposed by Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) for breach of s 52 of the Act.
Words and phrases – ‘co-ordinate liability’, ‘natural justice’.

Judges:

Gaudron ACJ, McHugh, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan JJ

Citations:

187 ALR 612, [2002] HCA 17

Links:

Austlii

Cited by:

CitedZurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd SC 20-May-2015
A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Damages, Equity, Natural Justice

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.566220

Jacob and Youngs Inc v Kent: 1921

Court of Appeals of New York. A building contract specified that the plumbing should use a particular type of piping. In fact the builder used a different type of piping. Cardozo J. stated: ‘In the circumstances of this case, we think the measure of the allowance is not the cost of replacement, which would be great, but the difference in value, which would be either nominal or nothing . . It is true that in most cases the cost of replacement is the measure . . The owner is entitled to the money which will permit him to complete, unless the cost of completion is grossly and unfairly out of proportion to the good to be obtained. When that is true, the measure is the difference in value. Specifications call, let us say, for a foundation built of granite quarried in Vermont. On the completion of the building, the owner learns that through the blunder of a subcontractor part of the foundation has been built of granite of the same quality quarried in New Hampshire. The measure of allowance is not the cost of reconstruction. ‘There may be omissions of that which could not afterwards be supplied exactly as called for by the contract without taking down the building to its foundations, and at the same time the omission may not affect the value of the building for use or otherwise, except so slightly as to be hardly appreciable.’

Judges:

Cardoza J

Citations:

(1921) 230 NY 239

Cited by:

CitedRuxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyth HL 29-Jun-1995
Damages on Construction not as Agreed
The appellant had contracted to build a swimming pool for the respondent, but, after agreeing to alter the specification to construct it to a certain depth, in fact built it to the original lesser depth, Damages had been awarded to the house owner . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Construction, International

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.526102

Slack v Leeds Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd: CA 1924

Nothing in Colls served to undermine the ‘good working rule’ of A L Smith LJ in Shelfer, although they discharged a quia timet injunction and ordered an inquiry as to damages

Judges:

Sir Ernest Pollock MR, and Warrington and Sargant LJJ

Citations:

[1924] 2 Ch 475

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedShelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Company, Meux’s Brewery Co v Same CA 1895
The plaintiff sought damages and an injunction for nuisance by noise and vibration which was causing structural injury to a public house.
Held: The court set out the rules for when a court should not grant an injunction for an infringement of . .
CitedColls v Home and Colonial Stores Ltd HL 2-May-1904
The courts below had concluded that the defendant had infringed the plaintiff’s right to light, and had awarded an injunction.
Held: the appeal succeeded. The House set out the requirements for establishing the existence of a right to light. . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromLeeds Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd v Slack HL 1924
The plaintiff complained of a threatened interference with ancient lights.
Held: Damages may be awarded in lieu of an injunction even where the injunction sought is a quia timet injunction, but that power imports a further power to give an . .
CitedCoventry and Others v Lawrence and Another SC 26-Feb-2014
C operated a motor racing circuit as tenant. The neighbour L objected that the noise emitted by the operations were a nuisance. C replied that the fact of his having planning consent meant that it was not a nuisance.
Held: The neighbour’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.536798

Workington Harbour and Dock Board v Towerfield (Owners): CA 1949

Judges:

Bucknill LJ

Citations:

[1949] P 10

Statutes:

Pilotage Act 1913 15

Cited by:

Appeal fromWorkington Harbour and Dock Board v Towerfield (Owners) (‘The Towerfield’) HL 1951
The occasions upon which the master is called upon to exercise his reserve of authority either by interfering with the conduct of the ship or by taking the navigation out of the hands of a competent pilot are rare and should the master exercise that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.410697

State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Wiegold: 1991

(New South Wales) The plaintiff was seriously injured in an industrial accident caused by the defendant’s negligence. At first he received payments of worker’s compensation but when these ceased he took to supplementing his income by growing and selling marijuana. This was a criminal offence for which he was convicted and served some eight months imprisonment. He also lost his employment. He claimed compensation for loss of earnings while in prison and afterwards on the ground that it was a consequence of the impecuniosity caused by the accident.
Held: (majority) This damage was irrecoverable. Samuels JA said: ‘If the plaintiff has been convicted and sentenced for a crime, it means that the criminal law has taken him to be responsible for his actions and has imposed an appropriate penalty. He or she should therefore bear the consequences of the punishment, both direct and indirect. If the law of negligence were to say, in effect, that the offender was not responsible for his actions and should be compensated by the tortfeasor, it would set the determination of the criminal court at nought. It would generate the sort of clash between civil and criminal law that is apt to bring the law into disrepute.’

Judges:

Samuels JA

Citations:

(1991) 25 NSWLR 500

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedGray v Thames Trains and Others HL 17-Jun-2009
The claimant suffered psychiatric injury in a rail crash caused by the defendant’s negligence. Under this condition of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, the claimant had later gone on to kill another person, and he had been detained under section 41. . .
CitedLes Laboratoires Servier and Another v Apotex Inc and Others SC 29-Oct-2014
Ex turpi causa explained
The parties had disputed the validity a patent and the production of infringing preparations. The english patent had failed and damages were to be awarded, but a Canadian patent remained the defendant now challenged the calculation of damages for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.347283

Porter v Secretary of State for Transport: LT 1995

A positive section 17 (or section 18) certificate has been issued on the basis that the relevant land would be developed, or could only be developed, in conjunction with other land in the vicinity. It was argued that no assumption arose as a matter of law that planning permission would be granted for such development of the other land.
Held: In such circumstances an issue estoppel arose so as to preclude the acquiring authority from reopening the issues of fact on the basis of which a section 18 certificate had been granted.

Judges:

Judge Marder QC

Citations:

[1995] 2 EGLR 175

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromPorter v Secretary of State for Transport CA 1996
Land had been compulsorily acquired for a road. The plaintiff was granted on appeal under section 18 of the 1961 Act a certificate of appropriate alternative development in respect of the land acquired, namely that the land acquired would have been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages, Estoppel

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.372589

Davy v Leeds Corporation: CA 1964

Harman LJ described the section as ‘monstrous legislative morass’ and ‘a Slough of Despond’.

Judges:

Harman LJ

Citations:

[1964] 3 All ER 390, [1964] 1 WLR 1218

Statutes:

Land Compensation Act 1961 6

Cited by:

Appeal fromDavy v Leeds Corporation HL 1965
The Corporation declared an area in which the appellants owned some slum houses to be a slum clearance area and made a compulsory purchase order. Compensation was to be assessed under the 1919 Act and the 1959 Act. The appellants were entitled to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.372347

Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty Ltd v Dredge “Willemstad”: 9 Dec 1976

Austlii (High Court of Australia) Negligence – Duty of care – Foreseeability of harm – Economic loss not consequential upon damage to person or property – Damage to property of one person – Economic loss suffered by person as a result – Pipeline carrying oil to plaintiff’s depot – Damaged by defendant’s negligence – Supply interrupted – Pipeline and depot owned by different persons – Expense incurred by plaintiff in arranging alternative means of delivery – Whether recoverable – Remoteness of loss or damage.
Shipping and Navigation – Action in rem – Action against ship – Negligence – Master not sued as defendant – Appearance entered by master – No proprietary interest in ship – Whether master liable to judgment.
A pipeline was damaged and the owner of the terminal (who was not the owner of the pipeline) incurred expense in transporting refined oil to the terminal while the pipeline was out of use.
Held: The plaintiff was entitled to recover that expense from the dredger which had damaged the pipeline. Jacobs J said that the duty of care owed to the owner of the pipeline was also owed to ‘a person whose property was in such physical propinquity to the place where the acts of omissions of the dredge . . had their physical effect that a physical effect on the property of that person was foreseeable as the result of such acts or omissions’.

Judges:

Gibbs, Stephen, Mason, Jacobs and Murphy JJ.

Citations:

[1976] HCA 65, (1976) 136 CLR 529

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

ApprovedCandlewood Navigation Corporation Limited v Mitsui OSK Lines Limited and Matsuoka Steamship Co Limited PC 1-Jul-1985
(New South Wales) Two ships had collided, after, without negligence, an anchor on one ship failed. The Supreme Court had found the crew negligent after failing to react appropriately to the loss of the anchor. The company now appealed against the . .
CitedD Pride and Partners (A Firm) and Others v Institute for Animal Health and Others QBD 31-Mar-2009
The claimants sought damages after the loss of business when the defendants’ premises were the source of an outbreak of foot and mouth disease. The organism had escaped from their premises via a broken drain.
Held: Much of the damage claimed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Damages, Negligence, Transport

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.331084

Sun and Sand Ltd v Fitzjohn: 1979

The EAT considered the deduction of sickness benefit from the compensatory award. Arnold J said: ‘The appellants before us say that that amount of sick ness benefit should be deducted from the amount awarded within the compensatory award for the 13 weeks of pay between the date of dismissal and the date of new emp loyment. The matter for consideration seems to us to depend upon whether the amount of the loss sustained by Miss Fitzjohn in consequence of her dismissal was the whole amount of lost pay or was the amount of lost pay less the sickness benefit. If the applicant was entitled to retain the sickness benefit to which she was justly enti tled, so long as her employment continued, in addition to receiving her pay, the loss would in our judgment be the net pay lost without any deductions; but if either she was obliged to accept some reduced amount of pay by reference to the sickness benefit she had received or so long as she was being paid under a continuing contract of employment was disentitled from receiving sick benefit at all, then in either of those cases it seems to us that the compensatory award for lost pay should be reduced by the amount of the sickness benefit which she received. It is not contended by the appellants that so long as her contract of employment continued she would have been obliged to accept any deduction from her wages by reference to the amount of sickness benefit she had received or otherwise obliged to account to her employers for the amount of that sickness benefit. They do however submit that the applicant was not in fact entitled to receive sickness benefit so long as her contract of employment continued and that therefore all that she lost, if she had received no more than she was justly entitled to, would have been the net pay and it would follow from that that, since during the period of unemployment she received in fact sickness benefit, then her loss would be the amount of net pay less the amount of sickness benefit. For this proposition the appellants rely on the language of s.14(1)(b) of the Social Security Act 1975; the relevant part of the sub-section reads thus:
‘A person shall be entitled to unemployment benefit in respect of any day of unemployment which forms part of a period of interruption of employment and to sickness benefit in respect of any day of incapacity for work which forms part of such a period’
and they point out that ‘such a period’ plainly means a period of interruption of employment. So they say she is entitled to sickness benefit only during a period of unemp loyment since this is what ‘interruption of employment’ means, so that if she had continued to be employed by the appellants she would not, so long as that employment con tinued, notwithstanding that she was off work for sick ness, be entitled to sickness benefit. The answer to that proposition is in our judgment plainly contained in the definition which is to be found in s.17(1)(c) of the Social Security Act 1975, which provides that the expression ‘day of interruption of employment’ means a day which is a day of unemployment or incapacity for work. It follows from this, in our judgment, that where a person suffers from an incapacity for work such as that from which Miss Fitzjohn suffered during the relevant period it matters not that she has the benefit of a current contract of employment, in relation to her entitlement to sickness benefit.

Judges:

Arnold J

Citations:

[1979] IRLR 154

Cited by:

CitedPuglia v C James and Sons EAT 24-Oct-1995
The EAT considered the effect of the receipt of benefits during a period of sickness when calculating loss of earnings, and whether a hearing was properly conducted without the presence of the parties.
Held: There is no procedural irregularity . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.278237

Harlow and Jones v Panex (International) Ltd: ChD 1967

The sellers claimed under a sale contract against buyers who had refused to accept goods. By reason of the buyer’s non-acceptance of the goods, the sellers had incurred storage charges to their own suppliers with whom they had entered into an agreement which effectively made recovery of the storage charges contingent upon recovery of the storage charges from the buyers.
Rosklii J said: ‘Next there are the storage charges . . [Counsel] correctly summarised the final position by saying that the bargain was that the Russian sellers would only claim against the plaintiffs if the plaintiffs could recover those charges from the defendants in this action. [Counsel] argued that an arrangement of that kind barred the plaintiffs recovering in this action. For my part I am unable to see why. The plaintiffs have – and this was not contested – apart from any agreement with the Russian sellers, a perfectly good claim for these storage charges. Why the plaintiffs should not make an arrangement for their own sellers, ‘we will claim these and hand the proceeds over to you if we recover provided you let us off if we do not’, I am unable to see. Nor do I see why the existence of such an arrangement should afford the defendants a defence which they would not otherwise possess. It seems to me an eminently sensible commercial arrangement . . ‘

Judges:

Rosklii J

Citations:

[1967] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 509

Cited by:

CitedGiles v Thompson, Devlin v Baslington (Conjoined Appeals) HL 1-Jun-1993
Car hire companies who pursued actions in motorists’ names to recover the costs of hiring a replacement vehicle after an accident, from negligent drivers, were not acting in a champertous and unlawful manner. Lord Mustill said: ‘there exists in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Contract, Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.272902

J W Dwyer Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver: 1967

The owner of a jewellery shop claimed to recover compensation from the police for damage to his shop in a smash and grab raid. Since there were more than 3 robbers, the police accepted that there had been a riot but defended the claim on the basis that the property had not been damaged by ‘persons riotously and tumultuously assembled’ within the wording of section 2 of the 1886 Act. The claimant said that the word ‘tumultuously’ added nothing to riotously or that, if it did, it should be read disjunctively.
Held: The expression ‘riotously and tumultuously’ required there to have been behaviour which was not merely riotous but also tumultuous. The claim failed.
Lyell J provided an historical analysis: ‘I now turn to consider both the meaning of the words and the question as to whether the words ‘riotously and tumultuously’ from their history are to be read as cumulative requirements, differing in character. Until very recently the victims of crime had, in general, no claim to be compensated for the injury they suffered as a consequence of the crime. Compensation for loss caused by a riot was a special case. This raises the question: Why was it made a special case? If a crowd of people collect in angry and threatening fashion this should become obvious to the local forces of order, and it would then become their duty to prevent the crowd from becoming a riot. This is a duty which has been recognised for centuries, and which until the 19th century was put upon the local administrative area, the hundred or wapentake, or whatever name it might be called; and there was a duty upon them to compensate for damage which was done by persons assembled riotously and tumultuously. The Act of 1886, in fact, did no more than modernise the mode of obtaining compensation and transferred the burden from the inhabitants of the hundred or wapentake to the local police authority. There is nothing secret or furtive about a crowd of people who are acting riotously and tumultuously. It seems to me that the right to compensation from public funds was given because public authority had failed to protect the public who were menaced by a threat which was, or ought to have been, obvious to the forces of law and order as they existed from time to time. In my judgment, the word ‘tumultuously’ was added to ‘riotously’ for the specific reason that it was intended to limit the liability of compensation to cases where the rioters were in such numbers and in such state of agitated commotion, and were generally so acting, that the forces of law and order should have been well aware of the threat which existed, and, if they had done their duty, should have taken steps to prevent the rioters from causing damage.’

Judges:

Lyell J

Citations:

[1967] 2 QB 970

Statutes:

Riot (Damages) Act 1886

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .
ApprovedDH Edmonds Ltd v East Sussex Police Authority CA 6-Jul-1988
The plaintiffs Brighton jewellers sought compensation from the police authority for a raid on their premises by three or four men. Kenneth Jones J at first instance held that the incident did not involve a tumultuous assembly and accordingly the . .
CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable CA 12-Feb-2009
The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory . .
CitedYarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority CA 23-Oct-2009
The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.270264

Hyundai Merchant Marine Co Ltd v Gesuri Chartering Co Ltd (The Peonia): CA 1991

If a legitimate last voyage under a charterparty nevertheless proves in the event to exceed the implied margin, the charterer will be bound to pay any increase in the market rate above the charter rate during the period of the excess.

Citations:

[1991] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 100

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedTransfield Shipping Inc v Mercator Shipping Inc (The Achilleas) HL 9-Jul-2008
The parties contracted to charter the Achileas. The charterer gave notice to terminate the hire, and the owner found a new charterer. Until the termination the charterers sub-chartered. That charter was not completed, delaying the ship for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.270750

Arab Monetary Fund v Hashim and Others (No 8): ChD 17 Jun 1993

Leave to amend was given to the defendant to add a claim for a contribution. It was not an issue of fact. The statute did not imply any assumption that the defendant would would not maintain a defence. Matters of foreign law were not part of the facts of a case.

Judges:

Chadwick J

Citations:

Times 17-Jun-1993, [1993] CLY 3134

Statutes:

Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 1, Supreme Court Act 1981 69(5), Rules of the Supreme Court Ord 18 r 7(1)

Damages, Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77849

Joyce Andrews v Initial Cleaning Services Limited McDougalls Catering Foods Limited: CA 14 Jul 1999

Employees of one company were injured whilst working cleaning the premises of another. The issue was as to apportionment of the personal injury damages between the two companies.
Held: There was an error of approach by the Recorder entitling the Court of Appeal to interfere with the apportionment. The defendant employer’s duty was not delegable, and their substantial presence in the premises placed a duty upon them to check the safety of the premises and was a very significant factor in any proper apportionment. Where employees of a company were working at a remote site, the employers retained the primary responsibility for ensuring that a safe place of work and method of work were provided, even when this extended to the condition of fittings at the remote premises. In this case the employers had 75 per cent and the owners of the building 25 per cent responsibility.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Laws

Citations:

Gazette 02-Sep-1999, Times 18-Aug-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1831

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Liability (Contributions) Act 1978 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBritish Fame v MacGregor (‘The MacGregor’) HL 1947
Two ships had collided. One party sought to appeal the apportionment of damages.
Held: The House considered the reluctance of an appellate court to interefere with an apportionment of damages applied by the court at first instance: ‘It seems . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77796

The Popi M; Rhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmonds: 1983

The parties disputed the cause of the loss of a ship. The experts suggested different but improbably explanations; each supported as the most likely explanation only because any other hypothesis was regarded as almost (if not altogether) impossible. The owners of the ship claimed against underwriters for her total loss which had occurred in calm weather. It became common ground that the vessel had sunk because of an ingress of sea water through a hole in the side plating. Underwriters contended that the vessel had been unseaworthy and that had been the proximate cause of the entry of water. The court made no finding that the vessel was seaworthy or that she was unseaworthy; he was left in doubt. The owners put forward a case that the hole in the side plating had been caused by contact with a submerged and moving submarine by eliminating other possibilities; the judge concluded that contact with a moving submarine was so improbable that if he were to conclude that it was the likely cause of the loss he had to be satisfied that any other explanation for the casualty had to be ruled out. The underwriters put forward a case that the hole had arisen through wear and tear and provided a detailed explanation as to how that had happened. The judge rejected that detailed explanation and was therefore left with a choice between the owner’s submarine hypothesis and the possibility that the casualty occurred as a result of wear and tear but by means of a mechanism which remained in doubt.
Held: Bingham J referred to the dictum of Sherlock Holmes: ‘How often have I said to you that, when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?’ He concluded that, despite the inherent improbability and despite the disbelief with which he had been inclined to regard it, the collision with the submarine had to be accepted on the balance of the probabilities as the explanation of the casualty.

Judges:

Bingham J

Citations:

[1983] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 235

Cited by:

At First InstanceRhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmonds (The Popi M) HL 16-May-1985
The Popi M sank in calm seas and fair weather as a result of a large and sudden entry of water into her engine room through her shell plating. The vessel’s owners claimed against her hull and machinery underwriters, contending that the loss was . .
CitedIde v ATB Sales Ltd and Another CA 28-Apr-2008
Each appellant challenged how the judge had decided between alternative proofs of causation of the respective loss. In Ide, the claimant asserted a fault in a cycle handlebar, and in Lexus, the claimant asserted that it caught fire whilst . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Litigation Practice

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.267224

D and L Caterers Ltd v D’Ajou: 1945

Damages in favour of a corporate body in defamation cases are limited to financial damage.

Citations:

[1945] KB 364

Cited by:

CitedAdelson and Another v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 19-Dec-2007
Applications were launched with in defamation proceedings to seek to recover damages for parties who had not previously been part of the proceedings.
Held: The amendments were refused. The new claimants were now out of time, and it was clear . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.263552

Woodstock Shipping Co v Kyma Compania Naviera SA (“The Wave”): 1981

There was a time charter for 24 months, 3 months more or less at charterers’ option. The owners repudiated the charter and the charterers accepted their repudiation on 2 August 1979.
Held: Assessing the charterers’ loss, and allowing for their ability to obtain a substitute fixture in the available market shortly after the date of the accepted repudiation the court compared the charterparty rate with the market rate in the early days of September 1979, declining to speculate whether market rates in September 1981 would induce the charterers to exercise their three month option one way or the other.

Judges:

Mustill J

Citations:

[1981] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 521

Citing:

AppliedMaredelanto Compania Naviera SA v BergbauHandel GmbH (The Mihalis Angelos) CA 1-Jul-1970
The parties had agreed a charterparty. The ship was to sail to Haiphong to load a cargo for delivery in Europe. The charterer had a right to cancel if the vessel was not ready on a certain date, but a few days earlier they repudiated the charter. . .

Cited by:

CitedGolden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’) HL 28-Mar-2007
The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.252490

P v South Gloucestershire Council: FD 2006

The applicant’s child had been taken into care by the defendant, on the basis of a proposed care plan. The authority abandoned the care plan but without consulting with the mother first. She sought damages saying that the authority had infringed her human rights.
Held: Though the authority had indeed infringed her human rights, a declaration accordingly was adequate compensation, and no damages award was appropriate.

Judges:

Hedley J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 749 (Fam)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromP v South Gloucestershire Council CA 3-Jan-2007
The local authority abandoned its care plan for her child without first consulting her. The mother appealed a refusal by the court to award damages.
Held: The appeal failed. The authority had infringed the mother’s human rights, but her remedy . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Human Rights, Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.248915

Arneil v Paterson: 1931

Viscount Dunedin spoke of a hypothetical case in which two dogs had worried a sheep to death: ‘Would we then have to hold that each dog had half killed the sheep?’
Viscount Hailsham said: The owner of one of the two dogs which had worried the sheep was liable for the whole damage because ‘each of the dogs did in law occasion the whole of the damage which was suffered by the sheep as a result of the action of the two dogs acting together’

Judges:

Viscount Dunedin, Viscount Hailsham

Citations:

[1931] AC 560

Cited by:

CitedZurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd SC 20-May-2015
A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Negligence

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.241496

Burton v Pinkerton: 1867

The Plaintiff agreed to serve on the defendant’s ship for twelve months, but left it when the Defendant berthed in a Peruvian port with a cargo which included ammunition, even though Peru was at war with Spain (”two powers at peace with England’). The Plaintiff regarded the proposed voyage as both illegal and more dangerous than he anticipated at the time of entering into his contract. He was imprisoned for some days as a ‘Peruvian deserter” and upon his release discovered that the ship had gone, still with some of his clothes on board. The jury gave damages for both the imprisonment and the clothing.
Held: Both heads of damage were too remote. Baron Bramwell: ‘It is true that in one sense the defendant’s conduct caused the imprisonment: but for that, no doubt, the plaintiff would not have been imprisoned. That, however, is not enough. Suppose, for instance, the plaintiff had met robbers whilst ashore, and been injured by them, he certainly could have recovered nothing from the defendant for such injury, yet the defendant might, in that case also, be said to have caused the damage. According to the ordinary rule, damage to be recoverable by a plaintiff must inevitably flow from the tortious act of the defendant. It must be caused by him as the causa causans, and this imprisonment was not so caused’. The Plaintiff could only recover for lost wages and possibly something for inconvenience. A new trial was ordered as it was impossible to disentangle how much the jury had included under each of the heads.

Judges:

Baron Bramwell, Baron Martin and Baron Channell

Citations:

(1867) LR 2 Ex 340

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedWiseman v Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd QBD 29-Jun-2006
The claimant said that he was refused permission to board a flight by the defendants representative without paying a bribe, and was publicly humiliated for not doing so.
Held: Whilst the claimant could recover for his own additional expenses, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Contract

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.243286

Wolmershausen v Gullick: 1893

Claim for contribution between co-securities. Wright J reviewed the development of the entitlement to contribution from Justinian’s statement of it, through its application by the custom of the City of London in the time of Queen Elizabeth to the time of his judgment.

Judges:

Wright J

Citations:

[1893] 2 Ch 514

Cited by:

MentionedAer Lingus v Gildacroft Ltd and Another CA 17-Jan-2006
The claimant had been found liable to pay damages for personal injury, and now sought contribution from the defendants. The defendants said that they were out of time since the contribution action had been commenced more than 2 years after the . .
CitedWimpey (George) Co Ltd v British Overseas Airways Corporation HL 1954
A joint tortfeasor could escape liability in contribution proceedings if it had been unsuccessfully sued by the injured person in an action brought outside the relevant limitation period. Where a court has to decide between two competing cases, if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Damages, Contract

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.238752

Littlewood and George Wimpey and Co Ltd v British Overseas Airways Corporation: CA 1953

The words ‘liable to pay’ in s 3 carried their usual meaning as ‘responsible in law’.

Judges:

Singleton LJ

Citations:

[1953] 2 QB 501, [1953] 2 All ER 915, [1953] 3 WLR 553

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromWimpey (George) Co Ltd v British Overseas Airways Corporation HL 1954
A joint tortfeasor could escape liability in contribution proceedings if it had been unsuccessfully sued by the injured person in an action brought outside the relevant limitation period. Where a court has to decide between two competing cases, if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.238753

Mercury Communications Ltd v London and India Dock Investments Ltd: 1993

Judges:

Judge Hague QC

Citations:

(1993) 69 P and CR 135, [1994] 1 EGLR 229

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedStokes v Cambridge Corporation LT 1961
The tribunal considered case concerned 5.1 ha of land with an assumption of planning permission for industrial development under Planning legislation. There was only one possible access over adjoining land in different ownership.
Held: When . .

Cited by:

ApprovedStar Energy Weald Basin Ltd and Another v Bocardo Sa SC 28-Jul-2010
The defendant had obtained a licence to extract oil from its land. In order to do so it had to drill out and deep under the Bocardo’s land. No damage at all was caused to B’s land at or near the surface. B claimed in trespass for damages. It now . .
CitedStar Energy Weald Basin Ltd and Another v Bocardo Sa SC 28-Jul-2010
The defendant had obtained a licence to extract oil from its land. In order to do so it had to drill out and deep under the Bocardo’s land. No damage at all was caused to B’s land at or near the surface. B claimed in trespass for damages. It now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.229248

Vision Golf v Weightmans (a Firm): ChD 26 Jul 2005

The defendant solicitors were joint tortfeasors, having failed to make an application to court in a timely fashion, when it might have succeeded. It defended the claim saying that had the claimant issued proceedings against a second firm that firm would also have been liable.
Held: The ‘but for test’ set out in Iraqi Airways was satisfied in this case. The claim fell within the purpose of the law imposing liability for professional negligence. Nothing prevented the claim against the defendant. The possible liability of a second party did not absolve the defendant.

Judges:

Lewison J

Citations:

Times 01-Sep-2005

Citing:

CitedKuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Company and Others (Nos 4 and 5) HL 16-May-2002
After the invasion of Kuwait, the Iraqi government had dissolved Kuwait airlines, and appropriated several airplanes. Four planes were destroyed by Allied bombing, and 6 more were appropriated again by Iran.
Held: The appeal failed. No claim . .

Cited by:

CitedFinecard International Ltd (T/A the Ninja Corporation) v Urquhart Dyke and Lord (A Firm) and Another ChD 10-Nov-2005
The defendants sought an interim ruling that they were not the cause of the claimant’s losses. They had acted as patent agents to license to exploit the claimant’s patent in the UK. They alleged that the failure to complete the registration of the . .
See AlsoVision Golf Ltd v Weightmans (A Firm) ChD 21-Jul-2006
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.229997

Paterson Zochonis and Co v Merfarken Packaging Ltd: CA 1986

The normal measure of damages for copyright infringement is the amount by which the copyright is depreciated, by the infringement, as a chose in action.

Judges:

Goff LJ

Citations:

[1986] 3 All ER 522

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedSutherland Publishing Co Ltd v Caxton Publishing Co Ltd CA 1936
. .

Cited by:

CitedLondon General Holdings Ltd and others v USP Plc and Another CA 22-Jul-2005
Copyright was claimed in a draft legal agreement. Infringement was established, but the court was asked to look at the assessment of damages.
Held: ‘what is the basis upon which damages for breach of copyright are awarded? The question cannot . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.228976

Sutherland Publishing Co Ltd v Caxton Publishing Co Ltd: CA 1936

Judges:

Lord Wright MR

Citations:

[1936] Ch 323

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPaterson Zochonis and Co v Merfarken Packaging Ltd CA 1986
The normal measure of damages for copyright infringement is the amount by which the copyright is depreciated, by the infringement, as a chose in action. . .
CitedLondon General Holdings Ltd and others v USP Plc and Another CA 22-Jul-2005
Copyright was claimed in a draft legal agreement. Infringement was established, but the court was asked to look at the assessment of damages.
Held: ‘what is the basis upon which damages for breach of copyright are awarded? The question cannot . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Damages

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.228977

Mitchell v Mulholland (No. 2): CA 1972

The plaintiff was severely injured, and recovered substantial damages. andpound;20,000 for pain and suffering and loss of amenity, and andpound;21,350 for nursing care. The court declined to adjust the award for anticipated inflation: ‘an award of damages for personal injury should not reflect the possibility of continuing inflation.’

Judges:

Widgery LJ

Citations:

[1972] 1 QB 65

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoMulholland v Mitchell HL 1971
The House was asked whether to re-open an assessment of damages where there had been a very marked change in the injured person’s situation shortly after the trial. There was no suggestion of fraud. The Court of Appeal had decided to admit the fresh . .

Cited by:

CitedCunningham v Harrison CA 17-May-1973
The plaintiff had been severely injured, and would need nursing care for the rest of his life. His wife nursed him until her death, but had given a statement that if not for her two full time nurses would be required. His employer continued to pay . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.225260

Kyle v P and J Stormonth Darling WS: 1992

Where a loss of opportunity which was the subject of a claim was part of the causal sequence which might or might not have led to the damnum or loss resulting from the injuria, the damnum lay not in the loss of opportunity but in the loss of the eye or the necrosis.

Judges:

Lord Prosser

Citations:

1992 SLT 264

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

CitedGregg v Scott HL 27-Jan-2005
The patient saw his doctor and complained about a lump under his arm. The doctor failed to diagnose cancer. It was nine months before treatment was begun. The claimant sought damages for the reduction in his prospects of disease-free survival for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.222508

Woodrup v Nicol: CA 1993

To decide the reasonableness of private medical and related expenses, regard must be had to section 2(4) [of the 1948 Act], which entails: ‘if, on the balance of probabilities, a plaintiff is going to use private medicine in the future as a matter of choice, the defendant cannot contend that the claim should be disallowed because National Health Service facilities are available. On the other hand, if, on the balance of probabilities, private facilities are not going to be used, for whatever reason, the plaintiff is not entitled to claim for an expense which he is not going to incur.’

Judges:

Russell LJ

Citations:

[1993] PIQR Q104

Statutes:

Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948 2(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedDixon v Were QBD 26-Oct-2004
The claimant and others were being driven by the defendant. All had drunk, and none wore seat belts. The claimant sought damages for his injuries. General damages were agreed, and the issue was as to loss of future earnings.
Held: The claimant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.219086

County Personnel (Employment Agency) v Pulver (Alan R) and Co: CA 1987

The parties were negotiating for an under-lease. The lease provided for rent to increase along with rent reviews under the head lease. The solicitors failed to ascertain the rent under the head lease, to advise his client to have the property valued, or to explain the unusual clause. The rent was reviewd to an uneconomic rent, and the client sued his solicitor for negligence. He appealed dismissal of his claim.
Held: The solicitor was negligent. In exercising reasonable professional judgement he should have alerted his client to the consequences of the unusual clause. As to damages, the court was not restricted to the diminution in value. The plaintiff was entitled also to the costs of surrender and possibly to the cost of a lease whch would be saleable.

Citations:

[1987] 1 All ER 289

Cited by:

CitedNeighbour v Barker CA 1992
Purchasers had set out to buy the property without having a survey, relying upon representations as to its condition, later found to be fraudulent, from the vendor. The condition was discovered only after exchange of contracts. The purchasers’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.219184

Scholes v Brook: 1891

Counsel for the appellant had submitted that the damages ought to be the difference between the value of the estate as stated by the valuers and the real value at that time. This submission was rejected.
Held: The argument was rightly rejected.

Citations:

(1891) 64 LT 674

Cited by:

CitedHedley Byrne and Co Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd HL 28-May-1963
Banker’s Liability for Negligent Reference
The appellants were advertising agents. They were liable themselves for advertising space taken for a client, and had sought a financial reference from the defendant bankers to the client. The reference was negligent, but the bankers denied any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.216367

Anderson v Davis: QBD 1993

The court referred to the judgment in Francis -v- Bostock: ‘That judgment of Russell J., as he then was, has been followed in other cases and it is with some trepidation that I decided not to follow it here, for the following reasons. First, in a case like this, which is one where any wise plaintiff without financial or investment expertise would be bound to require skilled advice on the management of his fund, I can see no difference, in principle, between an expense which is necessary under the Rules of the Supreme Court or pursuant to the direction of the judge on the one hand, and an expense which is enforced by circumstance, or which will probably be enforced by circumstance, save that the Court of Protection fees are bound to be judged as reasonable expenses, whereas other management fees may or may not be judged to be reasonable, in all the circumstances. Secondly, if the plaintiff has, in commonsense and good judgment, to spend management fees to use his fund to provide true compensation, that seems to me to be part of the economic loss which the Court is enabling him to recover. Put another way, if he does not take such management advice, at a cost to him, the reality is that the award will not compensate him as the Court intends it to do my making its award of damages.’

Judges:

Rodger Bell QC

Citations:

[1993] PIQR Q87

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Not FollowedFrancis v Bostock 8-Nov-1985
The court considered the question of whether the court should award the additional costs of receiving investment advice to deal with an award of damages: ‘The award I make is compensatory. The whole object of the exercise upon which I have embarked . .

Cited by:

CitedEagle (By Her Litigation Friend) v Chambers CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been severely injured, and a substantial damages award made. Cross appeals were heard as to the several elements awarded. The claimant sought as part of her award of damages for personal injuries the fees she would have to pay to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.200636

McWhinney v British Coal Corporation: 1993

A 41 year old man claimed that as a result of an accident, he was able to walk only 50 yards at a time and that with the assistance of a stick, and who was described as being for all practical purposes unlikely to ever work again.

Citations:

1993 SLT 467

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedIseabal Emslie v Anne Bell OHCS 12-Aug-2004
The defender had driven into the back of the pursuer’s car, causing the injuries. She claimed that the accident had aggravated a pre-existing slight injury to her knee.
Held: The pursuer’s accounts of her injuries had not been entirely . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages, Scotland

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.200618

Shearson Lehman Hutton v Maclaine Watson (No 2): 1990

When a court orders repayment of a sum, with interest the rate of interest may be the commercial rate, which would normally be 1% above base rate, but is variable on appropriate evidence.

Citations:

[1990] 3 All ER 723

Citing:

See AlsoShearson Lehman Hutton Inc and Another v Maclaine Watson and Co Ltd and Others 1989
The court considered the requirements of natural justice in the light of the decision in Gaiman: ‘Nor do I consider my conclusions to be inconsistent with the decision of Megarry J in [Gaiman] because Megarry J held that the principles of natural . .

Cited by:

CitedReed Executive Plc, Reed Solutions Plc v Reed Business Information Ltd, Reed Elsevier (Uk) Ltd, Totaljobs.Com Ltd CA 14-Jul-2004
Walker v Wilshire still Good Law
After successfully appealing, the defendant claimant argued for a substantial part of its costs, saying that the defendant had unreasonably refused ADR. To pursue this, it now sought disclosure of the details of the without prejudice negotiations . .
CitedAdcock v Co-Operative Insurance Society Ltd CA 26-Apr-2000
The claimant claimed under his fire insurance with the defendants. He sought damages for their delay in processing the claim.
Held: The power to award interest on damages is discretionary. The judge had refused to allow interest, at a rate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.199275

McKillen v Barclay Curle and Co Ltd: 1967

The Lord Ordinary had awarded the pursuer damages for tuberculosis, on the basis that in the accident he had fractured a rib and this had reactivated his pre-existing tuberculosis.
Held: The pursuer had failed to prove the causal connexion between the fractured rib and the tuberculosis, since there was no corroboration of the evidence of the pursuer’s expert witness. They accordingly allowed the reclaiming motion. In Scots law a wrongdoer takes his victim as he finds him. Foreseeability had no relevance to the determination of the measure of damage, once liability had been established.

Judges:

Lord President Clyde

Citations:

1967 SLT 41

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

ConfirmedSmith v Leech Brain and Co Ltd CA 1962
The reasoning in The Wagon Mound did not affect the rule that a tortfeasor takes his victim as he finds him.
Lord Parker CJ said: ‘The test is not whether these employers could reasonably have foreseen that a burn would cause cancer and that . .
CitedOverseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1) PC 18-Jan-1961
Foreseeability Standard to Establish Negligence
Complaint was made that oil had been discharged into Sydney Harbour causing damage. The court differentiated damage by fire from other types of physical damage to property for the purposes of liability in tort, saying ‘We have come back to the plain . .
CitedBourhill v Young’s Executor HL 5-Aug-1942
When considering claims for damages for shock, the court only recognised the action lying where the injury by shock was sustained ‘through the medium of the eye or the ear without direct contact.’ Wright L said: ‘No doubt, it has long ago been . .

Cited by:

CitedSimmons v British Steel plc HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant was injured at work as a consequence of the defender’s negligence. His injuries became more severe, and he came to suffer a disabling depression.
Held: the Inner House had been wrong to characterise the Outer House decision as . .
Obiter rmarks doubtedM’Kew v Holland and Hannen and Cubitts (Scotland) Ltd 1969
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.196527

Rust v Victoria Graving Dock Co and London and St Katharine Dock Co: 1887

Damages in nuisance are not to be increased by any subdivision of interests.

Judges:

Cotton LJ

Citations:

(1887) 36 Ch D 113

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd HL 25-Apr-1997
The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit . .
CitedNetwork Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Williams and Another CA 3-Jul-2018
Japanese Knotweed escape is nuisance
The defendant appealed against an order as to its liability in private nuisance for the escape of Japanese Knotweed from its land onto the land of the claimant neighbours. No physical damage to properties had yet been shown, but the reduction in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.195595

Broadway Approvals Ltd v Odhams Press Ltd (No 2): CA 1965

A company’s mind is not to be assessed on the totality of knowledge of its employees. Malice was not to be established by forensic imagination however eloquently and subtly expressed.
Russell LJ said: ‘the law of libel seems to have characteristics of such complication and subtlety that I wonder whether a jury on retiring can readily distinguish their heads from their heels.’

Judges:

Sellers, Davies and Russell L.JJ

Citations:

[1965] 1 WLR 805

Citing:

AppliedRookes v Barnard (No 1) HL 21-Jan-1964
The court set down the conditions for the award of exemplary damages. There are two categories. The first is where there has been oppressive or arbitrary conduct by a defendant. Cases in the second category are those in which the defendant’s conduct . .

Cited by:

CitedAlexander v Arts Council of Wales CA 9-Apr-2001
In a defamation action, where the judge considered that, taken at their highest, the allegations made by the claimant would be insufficient to establish the claim, he could grant summary judgment for the defence. If the judge considered that a . .
CitedCassell and Co Ltd v Broome and Another HL 23-Feb-1972
Exemplary Damages Award in Defamation
The plaintiff had been awarded damages for defamation. The defendants pleaded justification. Before the trial the plaintiff gave notice that he wanted additional, exemplary, damages. The trial judge said that such a claim had to have been pleaded. . .
CitedTelnikoff v Matusevitch HL 14-Nov-1991
The court should decide on whether an article is ‘fact or comment’ purely by reference to the article itself, and not taking into account any of the earlier background coverage. It is the obligation of the relevant commentator to make clear that the . .
CitedBray v Deutsche Bank Ag QBD 12-Jun-2008
A former employee of the defendant bank sued in defamation after the bank published a press release about its results which he said was critical of him.
Held: Where there is a real issue as to whether the words are defamatory of the claimant, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Damages, Company

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.194318

Shepheard v Broome: 1904

Citations:

[1904] AC 342

Citing:

Affirmed on AppealBroome v Speak 1903
. .

Cited by:

CitedSmith New Court Securities Ltd v Scrimgeour Vickers HL 21-Nov-1996
The defendant had made misrepresentations, inducing the claimant to enter into share transactions which he would not otherwise have entered into, and which lost money.
Held: A deceitful wrongdoer is properly liable for all actual damage . .
Appealed toBroome v Speak 1903
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.191187

Thompson v Smiths Shiprepairers (North Shields) Ltd: QBD 1984

The test to be applied in determining the time at which an employer’s failure to provide protection constituted actionable negligence was what would have been done at any particular time by a reasonable and prudent employer who was properly but not extraordinarily solicitous for his workers’ safety in the light of what he knew or ought to have known at the time. Lord Devlin’s statement of the law as to concurrent tortfeasors ‘does not . . demand the conclusion that where the court knows that the initial stage of the damage was caused by A (and not B) and that the latter stage was caused by B (and not A), it is obliged by law to proceed (contrary to the true facts) on the assumption that the faults of each had caused the whole damage.’ and ‘I see no reason why the present impossibility of making a precise apportionment of impairment and disability in terms of time, should in justice lead to the result that the defendants are adjudged liable to pay in full, when it is known that only part of the damage was their fault. What justice does demand, to my mind, is that the court should make the best estimate it can, in the light of the evidence, making the fullest allowances in favour of the plaintiffs for the uncertainties known to be involved in any apportionment.’
Mustill J adopted and developed the statement of Swanwick J: ‘I shall direct myself in accordance with this succinct and helpful statement of the law, and will make only one additional comment. In the passage just cited, Swanwick J drew a distinction between a recognised practice followed without mishap, and one which in the light of common sense or increased knowledge is clearly bad. The distinction is indeed valid and sufficient for many cases. The two categories are not, however, exhaustive: as the present actions demonstrate. The practice of leaving employees unprotected against excessive noise had never been followed ‘without mishap.’ Yet even the plaintiffs have not suggested that it was ‘clearly bad,’ in the sense of creating a potential liability in negligence, at any time before the mid-1930s. Between the two extremes is a type of risk which is regarded at any given time (although not necessarily later) as an inescapable feature of the industry. The employer is not liable for the consequences of such risks, although subsequent changes in social awareness, or improvements in knowledge and technology, may transfer the risk into the category of those against which the employer can and should take care. It is unnecessary, and perhaps impossible, to give a comprehensive formula for identifying the line between the acceptable and the unacceptable. Nevertheless, the line does exist, and was clearly recognised in Morris v West Hartlepool Steam Navigation Co Ltd [1956] AC 552. The speeches in that case show, not that one employer is exonerated simply by proving that other employers are just as negligent, but that the standard of what is negligent is influenced, although not decisively, by the practice in the industry as a whole. In my judgment, this principle applies not only where the breach of duty is said to consist of a failure to take precautions known to be available as a means of combating a known danger, but also where the omission involves an absence of initiative in seeking out knowledge of facts which are not in themselves obvious. The employer must keep up to date, but the court must be slow to blame him for not ploughing a lone furrow.’

Judges:

Mustill J

Citations:

[1984] 1 QB 405, [1984] 1 All ER 881

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedStokes v Guest Keen and Nettlefold (Nuts and Bolts) Ltd QBD 1968
An employee had been exposed at work over a long period to mineral oil which, on a daily basis, had saturated his clothing and come into contact with his skin. As a result of this he developed cancer of the scrotum from which he eventually died. The . .

Cited by:

AppliedHoltby v Brigham and Cowan (Hull) Ltd CA 6-Apr-2000
A claimant who sought damages for injuries suffered by the ingestion of asbestos whilst working for one employer, but had also worked for other periods for other employers where similar activities had been involved, had the onus in the claim to . .
CitedMcTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
CitedWilsher v Essex Area Health Authority HL 24-Jul-1986
A premature baby suffered injury after mistaken treatment by a hospital doctor. He had inserted a monitor into the umbilical vein. The claimant suggested the treatment should have been by a more senior doctor. The hospital appealed a finding that it . .
CitedSienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd; Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Willmore SC 9-Mar-2011
The Court considered appeals where defendants challenged the factual basis of findings that they had contributed to the causes of the claimant’s Mesothelioma, and in particular to what extent a court can satisfactorily base conclusions of fact on . .
CitedBaker v Quantum Clothing Group Ltd and Others SC 13-Apr-2011
The court was asked as to the liability of employers in the knitting industry for hearing losses suffered by employees before the 1989 Regulations came into effect. The claimant had worked in a factory between 1971 and 2001, sustaining noise induced . .
CitedZurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd SC 20-May-2015
A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Negligence

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.190109

McCarey v Associated Newspapers Ltd (No 2): CA 1965

References to damages awards in personal injury actions were legitimate in directing a defamation jury on quantum.

Judges:

Pearson, Willmer and Diplock LJJ

Citations:

[1965] 2 QB 86

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedRookes v Barnard (No 1) HL 21-Jan-1964
The court set down the conditions for the award of exemplary damages. There are two categories. The first is where there has been oppressive or arbitrary conduct by a defendant. Cases in the second category are those in which the defendant’s conduct . .

Cited by:

DisapprovedRantzen v Mirror Group Newspapers (1986) Ltd and Others CA 1-Apr-1993
Four articles in the People all covered the same story about Esther Rantzen’s organisation, Childline, suggesting that the plaintiff had protected a teacher who had revealed to Childline abuses of children occurring at a school where he taught, by . .
DisapprovedJohn v MGN Ltd CA 12-Dec-1995
Defamation – Large Damages Awards
MGN appealed as to the level of damages awarded against it namely pounds 350,000 damages, comprising pounds 75,000 compensatory damages and pounds 275,000 exemplary damages. The newspaper contended that as a matter of principle there is no scope in . .
CitedGleaner Company Ltd and Another v Abrahams PC 14-Jul-2003
Punitive Defamation Damages Order Sustained
(Jamaica) The appellants challenged a substantial award of damages for defamation. They had wrongfully accused a government minister of corruption. There was evidence of substantial financial loss. ‘For nearly sixteen years the defendants, with all . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Defamation

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.184739

Houston v Smith: CA 16 Dec 1993

Doctors operated within the same building. The defendant falsely accused the plaintiff of harassing her and her staff, groping them and fondling them sexually. The allegation was made in the hearing of several of the plaintiff’s patients in the doctors’ joint waiting room. The defendant denied having suggested impropriety with her staff but sought to justify her allegation of personal harassment, alleging that the plaintiff had brushed up against her deliberately. The allegation of sexual harassment was plainly a matter of the utmost gravity for a general practitioner, there were aggravating features and there had been no apology. The publication, however, had been only to a very small number of people. The Court of Appeal reduced the jury’s award of andpound;150,000 to andpound;50,000. If a prompt apology had been published the appropriate award would have been a very small fraction that sum.

Judges:

Hirst LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 16 December 1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKiam v MGN Ltd CA 28-Jan-2002
Where a court regards a jury award in a defamation case as excessive, a ‘proper’ award can be substituted for it is not whatever sum court thinks appropriate, wholly uninfluenced by jury’s view, but the highest award which a jury could reasonably . .
CitedNail and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd and others CA 20-Dec-2004
The claimant appealed the award of damages in his claim for defamation. The defendants had variously issued apologies. The claimant had not complained initially as to one publication.
Held: In defamation proceedings the damage to feelings is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.184742

Vaughan v Weighpack Ltd: NIRC 1974

(National Industrial Relations Court) In a claim for compensation for unfair dismissal, the employee should be treated as having suffered a loss in so far as he received less than he would have received in accordance with good industrial practice. However, the court applied the principle as it had been applied in earlier cases to hold that the employee who had been entitled to 3 months notice was entitled to recover earnings for that period, without deduction of post dismissal earnings, as ‘an irreducible minimum’ compensatory award. The court would not award damages for non-economic loss after wrongful termination of employment. The loss of wages during the notice period was ‘the irreducible minimum’ to which an employee was entitled.

Judges:

Sir Hugh Griffiths

Citations:

[1974] ICR 261

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedNorton Tool Co Ltd v Tewson NIRC 30-Oct-1972
(National Industrial Relations Court) The court was asked to calculate damages on a dismissal, and particularly as to whether the manner of the dismissal should affect the damages.
Held: The common law rules and authorities on wrongful . .

Cited by:

CitedDunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council; Williams v Southampton Institute; Dawson v Stonham Housing Association EAT 8-Apr-2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation
In each case, The employee sought additional damages for non-economic loss after an unfair dismissal.
Held: The Act could be compared with the Discrimination Acts . .
CitedDunnachie v Kingston-upon-Hull City Council HL 15-Jul-2004
The claimant sought damages following his dismissal to include a sum to reflect the manner of his dismissal and the distress caused.
Held: The remarks of Lord Hoffmann in Johnson -v- Unysis were obiter. The court could not, under the section, . .
CitedTradewinds Airways v Fletcher EAT 1981
The employee, an airline pilot, was entitled to three months contractual notice. The Tribunal had awarded compensation for the full three months even although he had earned a salary from other employment during part of that period.
Bristow J . .
CitedLangley and Another v Burso EAT 3-Mar-2006
The claimant had been dismissed shortly after becoming unable to work. She sought payment of her normal salary during the period of notice saying this was established good practice.
Held: ‘We are put in the invidious position of being bound by . .
CitedEverwear Candlewick Ltd v Isaac EAT 2-Jan-1974
Sir John Brightman referred to Norton Tool, Stepek and Hilti and then said: ‘The principle behind these three cases is clear. If an employee is unfairly dismissed without due notice and without pay in lieu of notice, he is prima facie entitled to . .
CitedBurlo v Langley and Carter CA 21-Dec-2006
The claimant had been employed by the defendants as a nanny. She threatened to leave, but then was injured in a car acident and given a sick note. The employer immediately engaged someone else. She was found to have been unfairly dismissed. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.183844

Flureau v Thornhill: 1746

A person who contracts to purchase land, but where the title is, without collusion, defective cannot claim for his loss of bargain. ‘These contracts are merely upon condition, frequently expressed, but always implied, that the vendor has good title. If he has not, the return of the deposit with interest and costs, is all that can be expected.’ ‘Upon a contract for a purchase, if the title proves bad, and the vendor is, without fraud, incapable of making a good one, I do not think the pourchaser can be entitled to any damages for the fancied goodness of the bargain, which he supposes he has lost.’

Judges:

Blackstone J, De Grey CJ

Citations:

(1776) 2 Wm Bl 1078, 96 ER 635, [1746] EngR 175, (1746-1779) 2 Black W 1078, (1746) 96 ER 635

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

ApprovedBain v Fothergill HL 1874
The defendants intended to sell to the plaintiffs their leasehold interests in mining royalties, but were under a covenant not to sell without the consent of the lessors. A condition of the sale provided for ‘ the usual covenant for our protection . .
CitedHollier v Rambler Motors (AMC) Ltd CA 19-Nov-1971
The plaintiff left his car with the defendant garage for repair. Whilst there it was substantially damaged by fire. The defendant sought to rely upon their terms which would negative liability, saying that the terms had been incorporated by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.183267

Rickless v United Artists Corporation: CA 1987

The Act created a private right to performers. Although it might appear to provide criminal sanctions only, performers had the right to give or withhold consent to the use of their performances and to enforce that right by action in the civil courts. This statutory right was not purely personal, but survived the death of the performer and vested in his or her personal representatives, so that in the absence of consent of a performer or his or her personal representatives, there was an actionable breach. A feature film (Trail of the Pink Panther – ‘Trail’) starring the late Peter Sellers had been made by use of cutting floor clips from previous films made with his consent. In two films, The Pink Panther Strikes Again and Revenge of the Pink Panther his consent extended to the use in this way of the cutting floor clips, and ordered the producer companies to account for percentages of the gross receipts of Trail as sums derived from Strikes and Revenge. In the case of three films where there had been no consent, damages were awarded for breach, or inducing breach, of contract in the sum of $1,000,000.
Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson V-C observed that, while not decisive, it was generally easier to spell out civil liability where Parliament had expressly stated that an act was unlawful rather than merely classifying it as a criminal offence.

Judges:

Hobhouse J, Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson V-C, Bingham LJ

Citations:

[1988] QB 40, [1987] 1 All ER 679, [1987] 2 WLR 945

Statutes:

Dramatic and Musical Performers Protection Act 1958 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedExperience Hendrix LLC v PPX Enterprises Inc and Another CA 20-Mar-2003
The claimant had obtained an interim injunction against the defendant for copyright infringement, though it could show no losses. It now sought additionally damages. The defendant argued that it could not have both.
Held: The case arose form . .
CitedCampbell v Gordon SC 6-Jul-2016
The employee was injured at work, but in a way excluded from the employers insurance cover. He now sought to make the sole company director liable, hoping in term to take action against the director’s insurance brokers for negligence, the director . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Intellectual Property, Media

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.180883

Skyrail Oceanic Ltd v Coleman: CA 1981

Damages in respect of an unlawful act of discrimination may indeed include compensation for injury to feelings.
In contrast to a jury, the Tribunal is expected to give reasons and hence can be judged by those reasons.
Lawton LJ said that: ‘any injury to feelings must result from the knowledge that it was an act of sex discrimination . .’

Judges:

Lawton LJ

Citations:

[1981] ICR 864, [1981] IRLR 398

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBennett T/A Foxbar Hotel v Reid EAT 26-Sep-2001
The employer appealed an award of ten thousand pounds for injured feelings, following a finding of sex discrimination. It was said that the award went beyond compensation to punishment. To vary such an award, the EAT must find some error of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.181280

Hogan v Bentinck West Hartley Collieries (Owners) Ltd: HL 1949

The workman plaintiff suffered from a congenital defect, having an extra thumb in his right hand. He met with an industrial accident and fractured the false thumb. It was treated by splinting but he continued to be in pain. He was then sent to the hospital where it was discovered that the fracture had not united. He was advised that an operation was required to remove not just the false thumb, but also the top joint of the normal thumb. The result of this operation was unsatisfactory as it left him with a tender stump which rendered him fit for light work only. The workman applied for compensation on the ground of this incapacity, which applied ‘Where . . incapacity for work results from the accident’ .
Held: This later incapacity was not the result of the injury which was caused by the industrial accident.
The question of the effect of a novus actus can only be answered on a consideration of all the circumstances and, in particular, the quality of that later act or event. Questions of causation are pure questions of fact which, if they are to be answered by a judge, must yet be answered by him as an ordinary man.
Medical negligence or inefficiency can be held to amount to a new cause of incapacity in some circumstances.
Lord MacDermott and Lord Reid, dissenting, were of the opinion that in interpreting the words ‘results from the injury’ in the Act, regard ought to had for the social policy of the legislation.
Lord Reid stated that the Court of Appeal was correct in holding that it was bound by authority but he was of the view that the House of Lords, not being bound, ought to change the law as it stood. He said that not only must the new cause come in but the old must go out; there must no longer be any cause or connection between the injury by accident and the present incapacity.
He considered that ‘grave lack of skill or care on the part of the doctor’ would amount to a novus actus interveniens.

Judges:

Lord Simonds, Lord Normand, Lord Morton of Henryton, Lord MacDermott and Lord Reid

Citations:

[1949] 1 All ER 588

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedRothwell v Caverswall Stone Co Ltd CA 1944
duParcq LJ set out two propositions: ‘In my opinion, the following propositions may be formulated upon the authorities as they stand: first, an existing incapacity ‘results from’ the original injury if it follows, and is caused by, that injury, and . .

Cited by:

CitedWieland v Cyril Lord Carpets Ltd 1969
The plaintiff suffered injury from the admitted negligence of the defendant. After attending the hospital she felt shaken and the movement of her head was constricted by a collar which had been fitted to her neck. In consequence she was unable to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.614914

Taylor v O’Connor: HL 1970

The appellant driver had caused a car accident in 1965, in which the respondent’s husband died. The respondent sought damages under the Fatal Accidents Acts for herself then aged 52 and for her 18 year old daughter. The husband died aged 53 and a partner in a successful firm of architects. His life expectancy on death was 18 years, and of the respondent 21 years. After tax, his income was pounds 7,500 per year up to retirement. Under the partnership deed he would have to leave some part of his income in the partnership as working capital and at the time of the death this amounted to pounds 10,000 and during the rest of his working life as a partner he would have left pounds 1,500 per year in the firm. When assessing damages the trial judge, holding that he might have continued as a full partner beyond the normal retirement age, or may have continued as a consultant, ruled that the husband would have continued to enjoy a net spendable income of pounds 6,000 per annum for the remainder of his life. The dependency of the respondent and the daughter were estimated at pounds 4,000 profit. Pounds 250 was to be deducted in respect of the accelerated benefit from the savings of pounds 10,000; tithe dependency for the purposes of the award of Damages was reckoned at pounds 3,750 per annum. The judge increased the proposed multiplier to allow for inflation. To the resulting song of pounds 45,000, the judge added pounds 9,000 as the present value of pounds 18,000, being the product of pounds 1,500 left in the firm for each of the 12 years. The Court of Appeal had refused to disturb the trial award. The driver now appealed against quantum.
Held: There were no grounds for interfering with the amount of Damages awarded by the trial judge.
Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Guest, Viscount Dilhorne, and Lord Pearson said that prospective inflation is not a valid reason for increasing a multiplier.
Lord Reid and lord Dilhorne said that in assessing the effect of the incidence of tax on and awarded damages, any private income of the recipient should be ignored.

HL

Judges:

Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Guest, Viscount Dilhorne, and Lord Pearson,

Citations:

[1970] 1 All ER 365, [1971] AC 115, 114 Sol Jo 132, [1970] TR37, [1970] 2 WLR 472

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKnauer v Ministry of Justice SC 24-Feb-2016
The court was asked: ‘whether the current approach to assessing the financial losses suffered by the dependant of a person who is wrongfully killed properly reflects the fundamental principle of full compensation, and if it does not whether we . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.606462

Rothwell v Caverswall Stone Co Ltd: CA 1944

duParcq LJ set out two propositions: ‘In my opinion, the following propositions may be formulated upon the authorities as they stand: first, an existing incapacity ‘results from’ the original injury if it follows, and is caused by, that injury, and may properly be held so to result even if some supervening cause aggravated the effects of the original injury and prolonged the period of incapacity.’ and: ‘If, however, the existing incapacity ought fairly to be attributed to a new cause which has intervened and ought no longer to be attributed to the original injury, it may properly be held to result from the new cause and not from the original injury, even though, but for the original injury, there would have been no incapacity.’

Judges:

duParcq LJ

Citations:

[1944] 2 All ER 350

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

ApprovedHogan v Bentinck West Hartley Collieries (Owners) Ltd HL 1949
The workman plaintiff suffered from a congenital defect, having an extra thumb in his right hand. He met with an industrial accident and fractured the false thumb. It was treated by splinting but he continued to be in pain. He was then sent to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.614915

Graham v Dodds: HL 1983

A court dealing with personal injury claims normally makes a discount in respect of damages for the future loss of earnings
Lord Bridge said ‘The only issue arising in this appeal which is strictly one of law is whether, in assessing damages for loss of dependency arising from a fatal accident, the multiplier or number of years purchase should be calculated from the date of death or from the date of trial. Counsel for the defendant has contended for the former. Counsel for the plaintiff has throughout contended for the latter and this view prevailed with the learned Lord Chief Justice and the majority of the Court of Appeal. The judge, in a short note appended to the transcript in his report of the trial, said:
‘I took the view that there is no legal principle that the number of years of purchase (in this case I suggest 11 to 14) should be automatically reduced having regard to the number of years special damage since the death of the deceased and that the contrast sometimes made with personal injury cases is not a sound one’.
On this issue the majority of the Court of Appeal examined the speeches in your Lordships’ house in Cookson v Knowles [1979] AC 556 and reached the conclusion that Lord Diplock and Lord Fraser of Tullybelton had expressed opposite and irreconcilable opinions. Gibson L.J. illustrated his understanding of the supposedly conflicting doctrines by indicating how they would apply in assessing the dependency of the widow of a young man killed at the age of 21, in the following terms:
‘Should the action not come to hearing until five years had elapsed Lord Fraser of Tullybelton would assess at death the multiplier, which I take at say 18, and he would then allow five years’ special damage and 13 years as the multiplier of future loss. Lord Diplock, on the other hand, would also give five years’ special damage and then fix the multiplier on the assumption of the death of the deceased at the age of 26 years, which Mr. Hill conceded would not be appreciably less than the original figure of 18′.
On the basis of such a conflict, Gibson and O’Donnell L.JJ. held themselves free to choose which of the two doctrines they preferred and both came down in favour of the view they attributed to Lord Diplock.
It is to be observed that in Cookson v. Knowles Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Salmon and Lord Scarman all expressed their agreement with the speeches of both Lord Diplock and Lord Fraser of Tullybelton. Gibson L.J. recognised this and described it as a ‘confusing feature’ of the case. It would indeed be astonishing that such a radical conflict should have escaped the attention of the three concurring members of your Lordships’ House, but still more astonishing that neither Lord Diplock nor Lord Fraser of Tullybelton should have said a word to indicate any awareness that they were disagreeing with each other on a matter of fundamental principle.
My Lords, I have to say, with respect, that the majority of the Court of Appeal based their decision in this case on a misunderstanding of the decision in Cookson v. Knowles [1979] AC 556. In that case the widow’s claim under the Fatal Accidents Acts arose from the death of her husband at the age of 49. The trial judge took 11 years’ purchase from the date of death as the appropriate multiplier. But he applied it to the estimated annual dependency at the date of trial, 2 1/2 years after the date of death, to arrive at a single capital sum of damages on which he awarded interest at 9 per cent from the date of death to the date of trial. The Court of Appeal reduced the capital award by estimating the dependency in two parts: (a) from the date of death to the date of trial, (b) from the date of trial onwards and allowed interest on the first part of the award only at a reduced rate. For the purpose of the capital assessment, the trial judge’s figure of 11 years purchase from the date of death had to be divided; 2 1/2 was applied in calculating the pre-trial loss, 8 1/2 in calculating the future loss. But the propriety of calculating the overall multiplier from the date of death was not questioned. In the unanimous decision of this House affirming the Court of Appeal, Lord Fraser of Tullybelton dealt with the last point expressly in the following passage, at pp. 575-576:
‘In the present case the deceased was aged 49 at the date of his death and the trial judge and the Court of Appeal used a multiplier of 11. That figure was not seriously criticised by counsel as having been inappropriate as at the date of death, although I think it is probably generous to the appellant. From that figure of 11, the Court of Appeal deducted 2 1/2 in respect of the 2 1/2 years from the date of death to the date of trial, and they used the resulting figure of 8 1/2 as the multiplier for the damages after the date of trial. In so doing they departed from the method that would have been appropriate in a personal injury case and counsel for the appellant criticised the departure as being unfair to the appellant. The argument was that if the deceased man had had a twin brother who had been injured at the same time as the deceased man was killed, and whose claim for damages for personal injury had come to trial on the same day as the dependant’s claim under the Fatal Accidents Acts* the appropriate multiplier for his loss after the date of trial would have been higher than 8 1/2. On the assumption, which is probably correct, that that would have been so, it does not in my opinion follow that the multiplier of 8 1/2 is too low in the present claim under the Fatal Accidents Acts where different considerations apply. In a personal injury case, if the injured person has survived until the date of trial, that is a known fact and the multiplier appropriate to the length of his future working life has to be ascertained as at the date of trial. But in a fatal accident case the multiplier must be selected once and for all as at the date of death, because everything that might have happened to the deceased after that date remains uncertain. Accordingly having taken a multiplier of 11 as at the date of death and having used 2 1/2 in respect of the period up to the trial, it is in my opinion correct to take 8 1/2 for the period after the date of trial. That is what the Court of Appeal did in this case/
If I may say so, respectfully, I find the reasoning in this passage as cogent as it is clear. But, what is perhaps more important, I can find nothing in the speech of Lord Diplock which conflicts in any way with Lord Fraser of Tullybelton’s reasoning or with his conclusion. The two passages cited by Gibson L.J. from Lord Diplock’s speech dealing with the assessment of the dependants’ future loss from date of trial are not directed to the question of the appropriate multiplier and certainly lend no support to the doctrine that this can be calculated on the assumption that the deceased, if he had survived the accident, would certainly have remained alive and well and in the same employment up to the date of trial. Such a doctrine, ignoring the uncertainty which, as Lord Fraser of Tullybelton pointed out, affects everything that might have happened to the deceased after the date of his death, is clearly contrary to principle and would lead to the highly undesirable anomaly that in fatal accident cases the longer the trial of the dependants’ claims could be delayed the more they would eventually recover.
Accordingly, in so far as the learned Lord Chief Justice based his directions to the jury with respect to the multiplier to be applied in assessing future loss on the considerations appropriate in awarding damages for future loss of earnings to a surviving plaintiff in a personal injury case aged 4 5 (the age the plaintiff’s husband would have attained at the date of trial if he had survived) and treated the pre-trial loss as ‘special damage,’ and in so far as the majority of the Court of Appeal approved the directions given on that basis, they erred in law’.

Judges:

Lord Bridge

Citations:

[1983] 1 WLR 808, [1983] NI 22, [1983] 2 All ER 953

Statutes:

Fatal Accidents (Northern Ireland) Order 1977

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

Not FollowedKnauer v Ministry of Justice SC 24-Feb-2016
The court was asked: ‘whether the current approach to assessing the financial losses suffered by the dependant of a person who is wrongfully killed properly reflects the fundamental principle of full compensation, and if it does not whether we . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.606461

Lac Minerals v International Corina Resources Ltd: 11 Aug 1989

Supreme Court of Canada on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario – Commercial law — Confidentiality — Mining companies discussing possible joint venture — Confidential exploration results disclosed during discussions — High potential property adjacent to lands of exploration company — Mining company in receipt of information purchasing property for own use — Whether or not company in breach of duty respecting confidences — Whether or not breach of fiduciary duty — If so, the appropriate remedy.
Industrial and intellectual property — Trade secrets — Confidentiality — Mining companies discussing possible joint venture — Confidential exploration results disclosed during discussions — High potential property adjacent to lands of exploration company — Mining company in receipt of information purchasing property for own use — Whether or not company in breach of duty respecting confidences — If so, the appropriate remedy.
Trusts and trustees — Fiduciary duty — Trade secrets — Confidentiality — Mining companies discussing possible joint venture — Confidential exploration results disclosed during discussions — High potential property adjacent to lands of exploration company — Mining company in receipt of information purchasing property for own use — Whether or not breach of fiduciary duty — If so, the appropriate remedy.
Remedies — Unjust enrichment — Restitution — Constructive trust — Nature of constructive trust — When constructive trust available.

Judges:

McIntyre, Lamer, Wilson, La Forest and Sopinka JJ

Citations:

(1989) 61 DLR (4th) 14 Can SC (Canada), [1989] 2 SCR 574, [1990] FSR 441, 69 OR (2d) 287, 1989 CanLII 34 (SCC)

Links:

Canlii

Commonwealth, Intellectual Property, Damages, Equity

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.556253

Canson Enterprises Ltd v Boughton and Co: 21 Nov 1991

Canlii Supreme Court of Canada – Canada – Damages — Breach of fiduciary duty — Solicitor preparing conveyance not advising purchasers of secret profit made on a flip — On agreed facts, purchasers fully apprised of situation would not have entered the transaction — Action arising because inability of other professionals found liable in tort for faulty construction of building on subject lands to pay damages — Whether or not damages recoverable.
The claim was brought by developers of land against the lawyers who had acted for them in the purchase of the land. The lawyers acted in breach of their fiduciary duty by failing to disclose their knowledge that a third party was making a secret profit from the purchase. The development proved to be a failure as a result of the negligence of the engineers and contractors involved. The appellants sought to recover the loss incurred on the development from the lawyers, on the basis that they would not have proceeded with the purchase if they had known of the secret profit. Recognising that the loss would not be recoverable in an action founded on breach of contract, negligence or deceit, the appellants instead sought equitable compensation for breach of fiduciary duty, arguing that such compensation was unlimited by principles of causation, remoteness or intervening acts.
La Forest J (majority) distinguished between the breach of a trustee’s obligation to hold the object of the trust, where ‘on breach the concern of equity is that it be restored . . or, if that cannot be done, to afford compensation for what the object would be worth’, and on the other hand ‘a mere breach of duty’, where ‘the concern of equity is to ascertain the loss resulting from the particular breach of duty.’ In the former situation the difference between restoration and damages was abundantly clear, but in the latter situation ‘the difference in practical result between compensation and damages is by no means as clear’. He went on to observe in relation to claims of the latter kind: ‘The truth is that barring different policy considerations underlying one action or the other, I see no reason why the same basic claim, whether framed in terms of a common law action or an equitable remedy, should give rise to different levels of redress.’
McLachlin J dissented as to the way the result was obtained but not as to the result. She rejected the argument that the starting point, when quantifying compensation for breach of fiduciary duty, should be an analogy with tort or contract. In her view, that approach overlooked the unique foundation and goals of equity. In negligence and contract the parties were taken to be independent and equal actors, concerned primarily with their own self-interest. Consequently, the law sought a balance between enforcing obligations by awarding compensation, and preserving optimum freedom for those involved in the relationship. The essence of a fiduciary relationship, by contrast, was that one party pledged herself to act in the best interests of the other. The freedom of the fiduciary was diminished by the nature of the obligation she had undertaken. The fiduciary relationship had trust, not self-interest, at its core.
She concluded: ‘In summary, compensation is an equitable monetary remedy which is available when the equitable remedies of restitution and account are not appropriate. By analogy with restitution, it attempts to restore to the plaintiff what has been lost as a result of the breach, ie, the plaintiff’s loss of opportunity. The plaintiff’s actual loss as a consequence of the breach is to be assessed with the full benefit of hindsight. Foreseeability is not a concern in assessing compensation, but it is essential that the losses made good are only those which, on a common sense view of causation, were caused by the breach.’

Judges:

Lamer CJ and Wilson, La Forest, L’Heureux-Dube, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin and Stevenson JJ

Citations:

[1991] 3 SCR 534, 1991 CanLII 52 (SCC), (1991) 85 DLR (4th) 129, [1992] 1 WWR 245, 1 BCLR (2d) 1

Links:

Canlii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Cited by:

CitedAIB Group (UK) Plc v Mark Redler and Co Solicitors SC 5-Nov-2014
Bank not to recover more than its losses
The court was asked as to the remedy available to the appellant bank against the respondent, a firm of solicitors, for breach of the solicitors’ custodial duties in respect of money entrusted to them for the purpose of completing a loan which was to . .
CitedMichael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott ComC 8-Jun-2011
The claimant challenged an arbitration award made concerning the agreement under which the defendant had been admitted to partnership. MWP contended that the Tribunal were guilty of a large number of serious irregularities in their conduct of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Equity, Damages

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.553778

Thomas v Bunn: HL 1991

From its enactment it was accepted that s 17 applied to orders for costs to be taxed – even though before taxation was completed there was no sum for which execution could be levied – and did so from the date of the order (the incipitur rule), not the date of the certificate of taxation (the allocatur rule), although the latter rule had for a while prevailed in Chancery.
Lord Ackner said: ‘If the words used in this section are considered in isolation, the problem would not appear to be a difficult one. It is accepted there cannot be a judgment debt until there is a judgment for a quantified sum, i.e. a final as contrasted with an interlocutory judgment. Such a final judgment is to carry interest from the time of entering up ‘the judgment’, i.e. the judgment which creates the judgment debt, i.e. the final judgment. This is made doubly clear by the provision that the interest shall run ‘until the same shall be satisfied’. Until there is a quantified sum which the judgment debtor is obliged by the terms of the judgment to pay, there is no judgment which he is able to satisfy. The final provision in the section that ‘such interest may be levied under a writ of execution on such judgment’ must refer to the judgment which has created the judgment debt. That is the final judgment.’ and . .
‘The wording of section 17 clearly envisages a single judgment which constitutes the ‘judgment debt’. This ‘judgment debt’ can only arise where the judgment itself quantifies the sum which the judgment debtor owes to his judgment creditor. The language of the section does not envisage an interlocutory judgment, but only a final judgment.’

Judges:

Lord Ackner

Citations:

[1991] 1 AC 362, [1991] 2 WLR 27, [1991] 1 All ER 193

Statutes:

Judgments Act 1838 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHunt v R M Douglas (Roofing) Ltd HL 1990
The plaintiff had an order ‘That the Defendants do pay to the Plaintiff his costs of this action . . to be taxed . . failing agreement’ and the House was asked as to the time from when he was entitled to interest.
Held: A litigant who has been . .

Cited by:

CitedInvolnert Management Inc v Aprilgrange Limited and Others ComC 8-Oct-2015
Date from which interest was to run on principal damages award. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Costs

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.553255

Page Motors Limited v Epsom and Ewell Borough Council: QBD 1980

The plaintiff company were tenants of land adjoining land owned by the defendant council. Gypsies came to occupy the defendant’s land over several years and in increasing numbers. The Authority had obtained a possession order but had failed to enforce it being concerned that with no proper site elsewhere to move onto further damage would be caused. The plaintiffs claimed for damages in their reduced turnover.
Held: The plaintiffs succeeded. The defendants had the power and duty to provide alternative sites, and their delay of five years was unreasonable. The choice not to enforce the possession orders was from the Council’s own desire to avoid disturbance elsewhere, and therefore amounted to an adoption of the nuisance. However, the drop in turnover would not necessarily reflect directly in a loss of profit, and the plaintiff’s had to give credit for the associated reduction in their rating assessment.

Judges:

Balcombe J

Citations:

(1980) 78 LGR 505

Cited by:

Appeal fromPage Motors v Epsom Borough Council CA 9-Jul-1981
The plaintiffs were lessees of land neighbouring that of the Council. Over several years the council’s land had been occupied by gypsies who, it was said had damaged the plaintiff’s business. Though the Council had obtained a possession order in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Local Government, Damages

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.445030

Pope v Energem Mining (IOM) Ltd: QBD 27 Jan 2010

Judges:

Royce J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 96

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromPope v Energem Mining (IOM) Ltd CA 5-Sep-2011
The deceased had been one of several abducted and killed whilst employed by the defendants in Angola. The company had promised to insure his life, but the insurers said that liability under the policy was capped. The claimant, the deceased’s mother . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.443628

The Oinoussian Friendship: 1987

A claim was made for physical damage to a vessel.
Held: Where the owners take advantage of the fact that repairs are being done by having owners’ work done at the same time, and (1) the owners’ work does not extend the cost of or period of repairs, and (2) the owners’ work was not immediately necessary so that the vessel would have been out of commission irrespective of the wrongful damage, in which case the owner cannot recover at all save insofar as the wrongful damage repairs add to the period of detention, there is no principle of law that requires apportionment by way of owners’ contribution to the outlay.

Citations:

[1987] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 258

Cited by:

CitedBorealis Ab v Geogas Trading Sa ComC 9-Nov-2010
The parties had contracted for sale and purchase of butane for processing. It was said to have been contaminated. The parties now disputed the effect on damages for breach including on causation, remoteness, mitigation and quantum.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Damages

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.425901

BP Petroleum Developments Ltd v Ryder: 1987

Compensation was made on the basis of an increase in value from andpound;40 per annum per acre to andpound;45 for the rights over the additional land sought by the special purchaser, the increase being made ‘for him to be certain that he will acquire the rights he seeks’.

Citations:

[1987] 2 EGLR 233

Cited by:

CitedStar Energy Weald Basin Ltd and Another v Bocardo Sa SC 28-Jul-2010
The defendant had obtained a licence to extract oil from its land. In order to do so it had to drill out and deep under the Bocardo’s land. No damage at all was caused to B’s land at or near the surface. B claimed in trespass for damages. It now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Damages

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.421491

Hollier v Plysu: CA 1983

The Tribunal may reduce any compensatory award by such proportion as it considers just and equitable. A Tribunal’s decision on this question is ‘so obviously a matter of impression, opinion, and discretion, that there must be a plain error of law or perversity before an appellate court can intervene’. The tribunal must consider: ‘what, if any, part the employee’s own conduct played in causing or contributing to his or her dismissal and then, in the light of that finding, decide what, if any, reduction should be made in assessment of his or her loss.’

Judges:

Stephenson LJ

Citations:

[1983] IRLR 260

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPunch Pub Company Ltd v O’Neill EAT 23-Jul-2010
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL
Reasonableness of dismissal
Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal
The Employment Tribunal failed to consider the effect of S98A(2) of the Employment Rights Act . .
AppliedCircle Anglia Ltd v Simons EAT 16-Oct-2012
EAT Unfair Dismissal : Reasonableness of Dismissal – Contributory fault
The majority of the Employment Tribunal, the Employment Judge dissenting, found the Respondent liable for the unfair dismissal for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Damages

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.421327

French Marine v Compagnie Napolitaine d’Eclairage et de Chauffage par le Gaz: HL 1921

A ship had been requisitioned after an instalment of advance hire had become due, leading to the frustration of the charterparty. The parties disputed whether the charterers were still liable to pay the hire in full.
Held: They were. The Tonnelier case had been so long acted upon in the time-chartering business and had been followed in such a multitude of settlements of ships’ accounts, that, unless it was manifestly wrong, it ought not to be overruled.
Lord Dunedin described the principle ‘frustra petis quod mox es restiturus’ as a ‘brocard’ of the civil law and held that judgment for the full charter hire should not be given where, although the hire had been due, it could be shown that it would be repayable in part, because, as Lord Dunedin put it, ‘it would be useless to give judgment for the respondents’ for more than the sum which was not repayable. Lord Dunedin said: ‘The question must therefore, in my opinion, be thus approached: On August 10 the respondents were bound to pay a month’s hire, on August 16 the further performance of the contract became impossible. Was there or was there not an accrued right on the appellants’ part to get repayment of such portion of the hire paid on August 10 as did not, as we conveniently term it in Scotland by a word which is wanting in English, ‘effeir’ to the period from August 10 to 16. The sheet anchor of the appellants’ argument is the expression used by Rigby L.J. and the Master of the Rolls in Tonnelier’s Case , that the payment in advance is ‘provisional’; coupled with the admission which had to be given by the respondents’ counsel that had there been a delivery at a coal port in the United Kingdom in the ordinary course on the 16th that sum would have been recoverable. I confess I was much moved by that argument, but on further consideration it appeared to me that the word ‘provisional’ might be too hard pressed. I do not think that by terming the payment ‘provisional’ the learned judges meant to say that the payment in advance was not really a payment, but only a deposit, leaving the question of payment over. The payment in advance is truly payment, but it can only be a payment of what the contract says is earned.’

Judges:

Lord Dunedin, Lord Sumner

Citations:

[1921] 2 AC 494

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedTonnelier and Bolckow, Vaughan and Co v Smith and Weatherill and Co CA 1897
The charterparty required the charterers to pay hire monthly in advance at the rate of andpound;709 per calendar month and at the same rate for any part of a month until her redelivery.
Held: The charterers were liable to pay a full month’s . .

Cited by:

CitedFarstad Supply As v Enviroco Ltd SC 5-May-2010
The defendants (E) were liable to F after a serious offshore accident, but sought a contribution from a third party (A), the main charterers, seeking to rely on section 3(2) o the 1940 Act saying that ‘if sued they might have been liable’. The court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Damages

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.410698